9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (4) TMI 71X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll 31-3-05 and during that period were availing Cenvat credit. (b) They vide their letter dt. 31-3-05 opted out of Cenvat scheme and started availing exemption under Notification No. 8/03 in respect of pressure cookers manufactured with their own brand name. They continued to avail the Cenvat credit in respect of input going into manufacture of pressure cookers cleared with the brand name of others. They also utilized the credit lying as on 31-3-05 for payment of duty for dutiable pressure cookers cleared without availing 8/03. (c) The original authority took the view that since they are clearing pressure cookers, with their own brand name & in the brand name of others, they can not simultaneously avail small scale exemption for the produ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e exemption and other for availing Cenvat credit. He relies on the judgment in case of Ramesh Food Products v. CCE, Ahmedabad reported in 2004 (174) E.L.T. 310 (S.C.). 6. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides. 7. The product manufactured by the appellant whether it is cleared on their own account or cleared with the brand name of others are both covered under Tariff Heading 76151910. The goods manufactured by them are specified goods for the purpose of Notification No. 8/2003. It seeks to enlarge the benefit in respect of small scale unit who export part of their goods and continue availing the exemption as value of clearances made for export are not counted for the purpose of determining the small scale exemption ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Modvat Scheme or Notification 175/86. Further, there is no one to one correlation between the inputs and final products under Modvat Scheme. It would therefore not possible to allow the manufacturer to simultaneously avail Modvat for some products and avail full exemption for others under small-scale exemption scheme." 9. The case of the appellant is covered by the ratio of Hon'ble Supreme Court cited supra. The claim of the appellant to avail Modvat credit for part of the goods cleared by them and at the same time seeking to avail small scale exemption for the part of the goods cleared in their own account is not permissible 10. In the light of the above, I hold that no valid grounds have been adduced to interfere with the findings ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
