9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 687X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ur for waiver of pre-deposit of the dues adjudged - Stay granted. - C/724/2012 - Stay Order No. S/1383/2012-WZB/C-I(CSTB) - Dated:- 31-10-2012 - Shri Ashok Jindal and P.R. Chandrasekharan, JJ. Shri B. Raichandani, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Rakesh Goyal, Addl. Commissioner (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER The appeal and stay application are directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. P-III/RS/161/2012, dated 30-4-2012 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune. The stay application is taken up for consideration. 2. M/s. Brintons Carpets Asia Pvt. Ltd. is a 100% EOU and manufacture woollen and yarn woven carpets. They procured raw materials for the manufacture of the aforesaid items both from abroad a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Notification No. 34/2006 in respect of the DTA clearances using the input materials obtained duty-free. In pursuance thereof the lower appellate authority has passed the impugned order. 2.2 The lower appellate authority has held that Notification No. 34/2006-C.E., is an exemption Notification issued under Section 5A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and thus the appellant has availed the benefit under an exemption Notification. Notification No. 52/2003-Cus. and 22/2003-C.E., allow a 100% EOU to procure raw materials for manufacture and export of specified products or clearance of the goods to DTA on payment of appropriate Central Excise duty. In this case, the appellant has not discharged any duty on the clearances made to the DTA and, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 012 (276) E.L.T. 238 wherein, in an identical set of facts, this Tribunal considered whether clearances under Notification 34/2006 are exempted clearances or not for the purpose of Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and it was held that clearances made under Notification No. 34/2006-C.E., cannot be equated to exempted goods. A similar view was also taken in the case of Universal Power Transformer Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore, 2010 (256) E.L.T. 244. In the light of these decisions, the advocate submits that they have a strong case on merits and hence, stay be granted. 4. The learned AR appearing for the Revenue reiterates the findings of the lower authorities. 5. We have carefully considered the rival submi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
