9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1983X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ransportation services. We find, this issue is no more res-integra in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CCE & Cus. vs. Parle Products Pvt. Limited [2010 (6) TMI 228 - Gujarat HIGH COURT]. The other issue is that the adjudicating authority disallowed CENVAT credit utilised for outward transportation. No proceeding was initiated against the denied cenvat credit and Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the exemption notification would apply only in respect of utilisation of the CENVAT credit. It is further observed that if at all, there is a case of wrong utilisation of CENVAT credit, right course of action would have been initiation of proceedings under the provisions of Central Excise Act, 1944 read with C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... months from July 2006 to September 2006. The adjudicating authority partly allowed the refund claims. Respondent filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). By the impugned order, Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal filed by the respondents as stated above. 4. The main contention of the learned Authorised Representative on behalf of the Revenue is that, Clause 1A of the notification stipulates that the manufacturer first utilise the whole of the CENVAT credit for the goods cleared during such months and pays only the balance amount in cash which is refundable. It is contended that the Respondent erroneously availed CENVAT credit for payment of service tax on Goods Transport Agency services used in the output services, which is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us. vs. Parle Products Pvt. Limited 2010 (258) ELT 485 (Guj.). The other issue is that the adjudicating authority disallowed CENVAT credit utilised for outward transportation. No proceeding was initiated against the denied cenvat credit and Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the exemption notification would apply only in respect of utilisation of the CENVAT credit. It is further observed that if at all, there is a case of wrong utilisation of CENVAT credit, right course of action would have been initiation of proceedings under the provisions of Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. There is no dispute that, no proceeding was initiated for deduction of CENVAT credit, therefore, benefit of the exemption notification ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... correct in as much as the notification allows the manufacturer, on exercising his option, to take credit of the amount of duty paid during the month under consideration, in his account current maintained by him and utilise the same for payment of duty in subsequent months, and such payment should be deemed to be payment in cash. Thus, whatever amount is paid through PLA for clearance of final products in terms of the notification, it becomes eligible for being taken as re-credit. Therefore, notwithstanding the discussion made in Para 12 13 above, the decision of lower authority to the extent of restricting the claims of the appellant is beyond the scope of the notification and has no legal support and therefore, liable to be set-aside. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
