9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (11) TMI 222X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ainst the Order-in-Appeal No. 131 /2005-C.E. dated 30-6-2005 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Bangalore. 2. The appellants utilized granules on which they availed Cenvat credit for the manufacture of the final product. These final products were exported under claim for Drawback. Since, in terms of the relevant Rules, they cannot avail both Cenvat credit and the benefit of D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r authority confirmed the demand and imposed penalty under Section 11AC. Interest under Section 11AB was also demanded. The appellants approached the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the Order-in-Original. The appellants are aggrieved over the impugned order. Therefore, they have come before this Tribunal for relief. 3. Shri Ramesh Ananthan, the learned Advocate, appeared ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... product, the raw material required is 110 Kgs. and 10 Kgs. are generated as scrap. Since they are getting Drawback on the finished product and since 110 Kgs. are required for manufacturing the finished product, the credit on the entire 110 Kgs. should be reversed. Since they had reversed credit only on 100 Kgs., they are liable for reversing the credit on the 10 Kgs. of scrap generated. Therefore, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at credit attributable to the inputs contained in the exported product. Therefore, there is no justification for demanding the Cenvat credit availed by the appellants on the scrap generated, which was only cleared on payment of duty. Hence, the impugned order has no merit. We allow the appeal with consequential relief, if any.
(Pronounced in open Court on 27-11-2007)
X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
