9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (5) TMI 533X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arch 2007, the appellant was required to discharge its duty liability by 31.03.2007, however, they defaulted to make the payment of Rs. 22,32,118/- for the said month in due time and the same was paid only in the month of December 2007. In terms of the provisions of Rule 8 (3A), the appellant s facility to make the payment at the end of the month or on fortnightly basis out of cenvat credit was withdrawn and they were require to pay the duty on consignment basis out of PLA. There is no dispute that the appellants paid the duty in respect of their final product at the time of clearances of the same by not utilizing the cenvat credit but in cash. 2. Apart from the dutiable goods the appellants were also manufacturing the other product ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, read with Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Hence the present appeal. 4. The lower authorities have confirmed the demand against the appellant by holding that in terms of explanation to Rule 8 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, expression Duty or Duty of Excise shall also include the amount payable in terms of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Thus the amount payable under Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 is treated on par with duty and bought within the ambit of the provisions governing manner of payment of duty envisage under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. As such it stands held by the lower authorities that consequently, in case of default in payment of duty, restriction of utilization of cenvat cred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... covered as cenvat credit wrongly availed. As such, it becomes clear that 10% of the price of the exempted goods is required to be paid by reversing cenvat credit. In the alternative, they submitted that they have already paid the duty out of the cenvat credit and in case the same is required to be paid out of PLA, they are entitled to reverse the credit in their cenvat account. The appellant is regularly making payment from PLA and in that case, the payments made from PLA shall stand reduced to the extent in question and the entire exercise would be Revenue neutral. As such, they contended that no demand is sustainable. 6. After carefully considering the submissions made by both the sides, I find that the dispute lies in very narrow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from PLA, they are admittedly entitled to make a re-credit entry in their cenvat credit account as they have already debited the said amount from their cenvat credit account. The said credit would again be available to the appellants to discharge duty on the final products cleared from their factory. As such, I find that the entire exercise is the revenue neutral, thus making the demand against the appellant as un-sustainable. 7. Further, as regards the clearance of inputs as such, the appellants have debited the amount from their cenvat credit account equal to the credit availed by them. The Revenue s stand that the same should have been paid from PLA, cannot be upheld in view of my findings above. 8. In view of the forego ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
