9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 439X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on inputs which are re-exported as such under Bond need not be reversed. The issue being covered by the judgment in the case of Zydex Industries [2007 (4) TMI 545 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD ], the demand for the availment of cenvat credit which is alleged to be incorrect is unsustainable - Decided in favour of assessee - E/42061 -42062/2014 - Final Order No.: 40441-40442 / 2016 - Dated:- 11-3-2016 - SHRI P. K. CHOUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Petitioner : Shri S. Karthik , Advocate For the Respondent : Ms. Indira Sisupal, AC (AR) ORDER Since both the appeals are arising out of the common Order-in-Appeal, both are taken up together for disposal. 2. M/s. MRF Ltd., the appellant company is primarily engaged in the manufac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1944. The adjudicating authority ordered reversal of ₹ 5,65,930/- along with interest and also imposed equal penalty. Being aggrieved, the appellant assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), who rejected their appeal and upheld the Order-in-Original. Being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 12.06.2014, the appellant company is in appeal before this Tribunal. Appeal No. E/42062/2014 4. The appellant assessee had imported X-ray Tube MCT-120-SN-9679 (hereinafter referred to X-ray Tube) vide Bill of Entry No. 5292786 dated 25.11.2011 from France and availed CENVAT credit on duty paid on such import amounting to ₹ 1,63,097/-. The credit was taken in RG23A (part-II) Register. Subsequently, it was fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xported from their premises, is required to pay an amount equal to the credit availed on such inputs as per Rule 3(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that the credit taken on the impugned defective imported inputs / capital goods are recoverable under Rule 3 (5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules at the time of re-export. That the reliance placed on the clarification given by the Board in para 8 of Circular No. 345 /2 /2000-TRU dated 29.08.2000 is inapplicable as the said circular did not clarify that the appellants are not required to reverse the credit when the inputs are exported as such; that the decision of the Tribunal in the case of M/s KCP Limited as affirmed by the Supreme Court reported in 2013 (2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e manner as it is provided for a final product under proviso to Rule 57F(4). Obviously, it follows from this that such inputs should be allowed to be exported under bond without any reversal of the credit. 7. The subsequent Circular No.345/2/2000-TRU dated 29.08.2000 in para-8 clarified that there is no bar if the inputs or capital goods are removed as such from the factory for export under bond which also finds reiteration in para 3.4 of Chapter 5 of CBECs Manual. This issue is no longer res integra as the same is covered by a plethora of decisions, the most relevant one being that of the Tribunal in the case of ZYDEX INDUSTRIES Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., VADODARA ( Supra). 8. This case is identical inasmuch as the inputs whic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
