Amendment of rule 6 of the CCR, 2004 - Regarding.

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ted to the issue of reversal of wrongful availment of credit used in manufacture or production of non-excisable goods. The issue has been under litigation for a while. During a manufacturing process two kinds of goods may come into existence - excisable and non-excisable. Excisable goods can further be divided into two categories - exempted and non-exempted. 2. Provisions of rule 6 of the C .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... so required to be reversed under rule 6 . However, for a manufacturer such provision does not exist in rule 6 . Any raw material, consumables or services which are used in manufacture of non-excisable goods would not attract provisions of rule 6 as the definition of exempted goods would not cover non-excisable goods. Thus rule 6 seems to have no applicability for reversal or recovery of cred .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... used in production of non-excisable goods if a manufacturer manufactures/produces both excisable and non-excisable goods, as rule 6 does not apply in such case. One possible way to address the situation would be to amend the definition of exempted goods in the CCR, 2004 such that non-excisable goods would be deemed to be exempted goods. Then the rigour of rule 6 would apply for reversal o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X