9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (2) TMI 954X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is being cleared at nil rate of duty under various exemption notifications for use in or in relation to the manufacture of fertilizer, therefore the impugned order is not sustainable - matter is remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for de novo adjudication - EDM-386/2005 - A-100/KOL/2010 - Dated:- 9-2-2010 - S/Shri S.S. Kang, S.K. Gaule, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri B.B. Agrawal, Jt. CDR, for the Appellant. S/Shri S.K. Bagaria, Sr. Advocate assisted by P. Banerjee and S. Bagaria, Advocates, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.S. Kang, Vice-President]. Heard both sides. 2. Revenue filed this Appeal against the Adjudication Order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Patna. The Commissioner in the impugned order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Respondent on the ground that the Respondent was availing the input credit in respect of the common inputs used in or in relation to the manufacture of Naphtha which was cleared at nil rate of duty in terms of exemption notifications as well as on payment of duty. Hence, the Respondent is liable to pay 8% of the price of the Naphtha cleared at nil rate of duty in view of the provisions of Rule 57CC/57AD of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2001. Contention of the Revenue is that the Adjudicating Authority dropped the demand on the ground that the clearance of goods under Chapter X Procedure, was not to be treated as clearance under exemption Notification or clearance at nil rate of duty. The Revenue poin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed suo motu. The Respondent also took the plea of time-bar, as the duty was being demanded by invoking the extended period of limitation on the ground that the Naphtha was being cleared at nil rate of duty under Chapter X Procedure. Hence, there was no suppression of facts with intent to evade payment of the duty and therefore, the demand is not sustainable. It is also submitted that prior to issuance of the present Show Cause Notice, the earlier adjudication proceedings where such credit was denied, and the issue of time-bar is not gone into by the Adjudicating Authority. 5. We find that the Adjudicating Authority has dropped the demand on the ground that as Naphtha was cleared at nil rate of duty under Chapter : X Procedure, the same is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
