9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (9) TMI 38X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e respective Orders-in-Appeal No. 105/2005-C.E., 107/2005- C.E., 108/2005-C.E. all dated 30-3-2005 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Coimbatore. The impugned orders affirmed demand of duty of respectively Rs. 2,57,423/-, Rs. 30,914/-, Rs. 47,041/- along with equal amount of interest from the appellants. The appeals involve a common dispute relating to quantification of credit admissible to manufacturers of grey cotton fabrics with reference to the quantum of inputs lying in stock, in process and contained in finished goods as on 1-4-2003, in terms of Rule 9A(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, (in short CCR), as they existed during the material period. The said Rule 9A(1) provided for the manufacturers to avail credit equal to the duty pai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ments in proof of credit admissible on the quantity of inputs contained in the finished goods in stock. However, the original authority had held that the appellants were ineligible for credit on the basis of duty paying documents on inputs contained in the finished goods on the ground that they had chosen to avail the credit on the basis of formula prescribed in, sub-rule (3) of Rule 9A in respect of stock of inputs and inputs contained in working process. The Commissioner (Appeals) overruled that objection in the impugned order and decided that the manufacturers could avail the methods in Rule 9(A)(1) and (2) simultaneously. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) denied the credit admissible on the basis of duty paying documents for the input ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had the option to avail the credit simultaneously on the basis of the formula as per Rule 9A(3) and on the basis of duty paying documents as per Rule 9A(1). If the assessees had filed the declaration in respect of inputs at various stages in stock as on 31-3-2003 by 15-6-2003, credit could not be denied to them. 4. I have carefully considered the records and submissions made by both sides. As rightly held by the lower authority, the Rule did not prohibit eligible manufacturers from availing input credit on the basis of duty paying documents as provided in Rule 9A(1) and on the basis of formula contained in Rule 9A(3) simultaneously. In cases covered by the three appeals, the appellants had declared the requisite information to avail cre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
