9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1103X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mited company in organized sector and they should have obtained proper permission to store the imported waste i.e., inputs, outside the factory premises - assessee is entitled to storage of inputs outside the factory of the manufacturer, subject to the permission from the Dy. Commissioner, Central Excise or the Asstt. Commissioner, Central Excise as the case may be, having jurisdiction over the factory of the manufacturer. The proviso to Rule 8 states that, if such input is not used in the manner specified in the rules, the manufacturer of the final products shall pay an amount equal to the credit availed therein. In my considered view, the demand of cenvat credit would arise if the manufacturer fails to establish that the input in question ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that the appellant had not obtained the permission to store the duty paid inputs outside the factory premises from the jurisdictional Dy commissioner of Central Excise and they have contravened the provisions of the Rule 8 of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004. The appellant reversed the credit of ₹ 8,99,966/-in respect of the goods destroyed during the fire before issue of the show cause notice. The Adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of cenvat credit alongwith interest and imposed penalty of equal amount. The matter went upto the Tribunal. By order No S/273/WZB/AHD/2009, A/344/WZB/AHD/2009 dtd 20.1.2009, the Tribunal remanded the matter to the Adjudicating Authority for de-novo adjudication. The Adjudication Authority in de-nevo adj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hand, the learned Authorised Representative on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). He submits that the appellants removed the duty paid inputs from their factory premises without the permission of the Dy Commissioner, Central Excise, which is violation of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules. So, they are bound to reverse the credit and therefore, the demand of cenvat credit is justified. He further submits that the appellant failed to establish before the lower authorities that the inputs in question were used in the manufacture of the final product. He also submits that it is a clear case of wrongful availment of the cenvat credit which was detected by the Central Excise Officers on the basis of enq ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h input. 7. On plain reading of Rule 8 of Cenvat Credit Rule 2004, it is clear that the assessee is entitled to storage of inputs outside the factory of the manufacturer, subject to the permission from the Dy. Commissioner, Central Excise or the Asstt. Commissioner, Central Excise as the case may be, having jurisdiction over the factory of the manufacturer. The proviso to Rule 8 states that, if such input is not used in the manner specified in the rules, the manufacturer of the final products shall pay an amount equal to the credit availed therein. In my considered view, the demand of cenvat credit would arise if the manufacturer fails to establish that the input in question was not used in the manufacture of final products. I agree wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
