9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 221X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t credit attributable to the inputs which are used in the manufacturing of exempted goods is undisputed, we find that the issue is now squarely covered by the retrospective amendment of the Cenvat Credit Rules by the Finance Act, 2010 which contemplates for reversal of Cenvat credit attributable to the inputs which are used in the manufacturing of exempted goods. impugned order confirming the demands of an amount equivalent to 8%/10% of the value of the exempted goods is incorrect and unsustainable and hence liable to be set aside - Following decision of Unimed Technologies Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Vapi [2012 (11) TMI 820 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD] - Decided in favour of assessee. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted final product from their factory. The Department entertained a view that the appellant's practice of reversing credit of duty paid on these two inputs on the input-output basis at the time of clearance of the exempted final product from the factory was not permissible under the Rules, and that the appellant was required to pay amount equal to 8% of the price of exempted final product in terms of Rule 57AD of the Central Excise Rules 1944 and Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules 2001, as the appellants failed to maintain separate accounts of these inputs meant for use in the manufacture of exempted final product. Therefore, the Department issued show cause notice dated 05.10.2001 to the appellant and confirmed demand of ₹ 14,37,740 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise, Nagpur - [1996 (81) ELT 3 (S.C.)]; (iv) Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh Vs. Jagan Tubes Limited - [2004 (175) ELT 200 (Tri. Del.)]; (v) Rochees Watches Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Jaipur - [2003 (152) ELT 420 (Tri. Del.)]; and (vi) Unimed Technologies Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Vapi - [2012 (278) ELT 461 (Tri. Ahmd.)]. (d) That during the material period the appellants had availed total CENVAT Credit of ₹ 23,673/- in respect of Liquid Nitrogen, out of which an amount of ₹ 16,508/- has already been reversed in respect of exempted final product leaving a net CENVAT Credit of ₹ 7,165/- actually availed. Similarly, in respect of LDO the total CENV ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of reversal of Cenvat credit attributable to the inputs which are used in the manufacturing of exempted goods is undisputed, we find that the issue is now squarely covered by the retrospective amendment of the Cenvat Credit Rules by the Finance Act, 2010 which contemplates for reversal of Cenvat credit attributable to the inputs which are used in the manufacturing of exempted goods. 7. In our considered opinion, the appellant was following the procedure even before the retrospective amendment came into picture. 8. In light of the foregoing, we find that the impugned order confirming the demands of an amount equivalent to 8%/10% of the value of the exempted goods is incorrect and unsustainable and hence liable to be set aside. 7. It is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
