2009 (11) TMI 792

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... used for generation of electricity sold to outsiders - the appellant not having maintained the records separately to show the quantum of inputs used for generation of electricity, for its captive consumption and sale to outsiders, the appellant has rightly been called upon to pay 8% of the value of the electricity supplied to outside. The matter calls for remitting back the same to the ld. Adjudicating Authority to work-out the quantum of demand attributable to the direction aforesaid in respect of the normal period - demand is confirmed to normal period of limitation - penalty is set aside - appeal allowed by way of remand.
Shri M. Veeraiyan and D.N. Panda, JJ. Shri Rajesh Chibber, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Vijai Kumar, SDR, f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... if the appellant is not eligible to Cenvat credit in respect of the inputs used for generation of the electricity sold to outsiders, there can not be recovery of 8% of the value of the electricity so sold. According to him, while ld. Adjudicating Authority passed the order, he had no advantage of reading of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maruti Suzuki Ltd. - 2009 (240) E.L.T. 641 (S.C.). He relied upon para 20 of the judgment and submits that there is no dispute at all in respect of inputs used for generation of the electricity meant for captive consumption. However, Cenvat credit is not admissible in respect of inputs used for generation of electricity sold outside without recovery of 8% of value of electricity s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... bserved that there was no evidence to show conspicuously as to the inputs used for aforesaid two purposes distinctly. Ld. Commissioner came to conclusion that there was no evidence for demarcation. This is suffice on our part to hold that the appellant is not eligible to Cenvat credit in respect of inputs used for generation of electricity sold to outsiders. We therefore hold that the appellant not having maintained the records separately to show the quantum of inputs used for generation of electricity, for its captive consumption and sale to outsiders, the appellant has rightly been called upon to pay 8% of the value of the electricity supplied to outside. 7. While holding as aforesaid, we also find that the matter of recovery as above be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X