Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (11) TMI 1338

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ates to the period May, 2002 to December, 2010. The Ld. Sr. Advocate submitted that in confirming the demand the Ld. adjudicating authority has disposed eight show cause notices issued periodically for the relevant period. The Ld. Sr. Advocate further submitted that the applicant are engaged in the manufacture of non-alcoholic beverages, viz. fruit pulp, fruit juice, drinks like, Maaza which was exempted for the relevant period. The Ld. Sr. Advocate submitted that in the manufacture of dutiable goods as well as exempted product, namely, Maaza, common inputs, namely, sugar, chemical, caustic lye, chain lubricant and furnace oil have been used during the relevant period. The Ld. Sr. Advocate further submitted that even though they were not ma .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is his submission that in the event the Ld. Commissioner has not been satisfied with the amount of credit proportionately reversed by them, the Ld. Commissioner would have asked for reversal of the amount of credit arrived at by the Department. But, the Ld. Commissioner has not been empowered under the said Finance Act, 2010 to reject their application, for the subsequent period i.e. 1st April, 2008 to December, 2010. The Ld. Sr. Advocate submitted that even though a procedure has been prescribed under sub-rule 3(A) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2006 for reversal of proportionate credit on inputs and input services that had gone into the manufacture of exempted goods, they have continued to reverse proportionate credit, but did not follow the pr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rintendent. 4. The Ld. A.R. for the Revenue reiterated the findings of the Ld. Commissioner. The Ld. A.R. has submitted that since the Chartered Accountant's certificate certifying the amount of proportionate CENVAT Credit liable to be reversed had not been supported by documentary evidences, the Ld. Commissioner has rightly rejected the said certificate and also the contention of the applicant. Rebutting the argument of the Applicant that the Commissioner is not authorized to reject the Application made pursuant to Section 72/73 of Finance Act, 2010, the Ld. A.R. for the Revenue has submitted that under the said provision the Commissioner has been authorized to cause verification of the correctness of the amount paid, which impliedly, emp .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... AT Credit short paid after calculating the entire credit availed on the inputs attributable to the exempted products. However, since it led to confusion, they have filed another certificate on 23.06.2011 whereby bifurcation of total credit availed by them has been stated indicating credit already reversed by them and credit required to be reversed for the said period. We find that the Ld. Commissioner has rejected the said certificates and also the application of the appellant on the ground that the said certificates had not adopted actual consumption, but on the basis of standard consumption figure as per the formula adopted for manufacture of the said items, without arriving at the correct amount of proportionate credit required to be rev .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ntendent's report we find that whatever amount reversed for the relevant period by the appellant had been accepted and no objection was raised. Thus, this also needs scrutiny/examination by the Ld. Commissioner. In these circumstances, we think it is a fit case to be remitted to the Ld. Commissioner to reconsider all the issues afresh in the light of the report of the range Superintendent referred to in the impugned order. We make it. clear that all issues are kept open and we have not expressed our opinion on any of the issues. Needless to mention a reasonable opportunity of hearing be given to the appellant. Appeal allowed by way of remand. Stay Petition disposed of. (Pronounced and dictated in the open court.)
Case laws, Decisions, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates