9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 544X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8) TMI 66 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA] relied upon by the Revenue is of no help. In these circumstances, I allow the appeal of the appellant and set aside the impugned order - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. E/1111/08 - A/1323/14/SMB/C-IV - Dated:- 30-7-2014 - Anil Choudhary, J. For the Appellant : Shri Rajesh Ostwal, Adv. For the Respondent: Shri Ashutosh Nath, AC (AR) ORDER Per: Anil Choudhary: The appellant M/s Glenmark Generics Ltd. has preferred the present appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. P-III/152/2008 dated 27.6.2008 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune-III, whereby for loss of Work-in-Progress (WIP), input credit disallowed by the original adjudicating authority was up ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s taken should not be held liable for confiscation under Rule 13 and why not fine be imposed in lieu of confiscation under Section 34 of the Act. 2.1 The appellant appeared and contested the show-cause notice, vide Order-in-Original dated 25.10.2007, the proposed demand was confirmed along with interest and an equal amount of penalty was imposed under Section 11AC read with Rule 13 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. No order of confiscation was issued. 2.2 Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) recorded the finding that the essential condition for utilizing of CENVAT Credit is that inputs are used in or in relation of manufacture of products/goods which are cleared ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... national Ltd. (Unit-II) Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise - 2012 (282) ELT 232 (Tri-Del), in which case also work-in-progress was destroyed, following the ruling of this Tribunal in the case of Indchem Electronics (supra), it was held that there is no requirement of reversal of CENVAT Credit availed on destroyed goods (WIP) during the process of manufacture in fire and it was also held that instructions contained in the CBE C Circular No. 907/27/2009/CX dated 7.9.2009, being contrary to the decision of the Tribunal, is not sustainable. The appellant also relies on the ruling of the Tribunal in the case of Nectar Life Sciences Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh - 2013 (293) ELT 247 (Tri-Del) for loss of WIP following the ru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
