2015 (8) TMI 1315

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y D.R. ORDER This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 3 rd June, 2010 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs and Central Excise, Lucknow, wherein the cenvat demand on the glass bottles has been confirmed. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in manufacture of Aerated Water falling under Chapter 22 of the first schedule of the Central Excise Tar .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ounsel for the appellant submits that during the disputed period, there was no provisions in the Cenvat Credit Rules for reversal of cenvat credit in the case of consideration of remission of duty on the goods destroyed. He submits that the provisions for reversal of cenvat credit came into effect only on 07.09.2007 through insertion of Sub-Rule 5 (C) of Rule 3 in the Cenvat Credit Rules. Accordin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sides and perused the records. 7. The dispute involved in the present case is for the period May to June, 2005 and March to June, 2006. During  the relevant time, there were no provisions contained in the above Cenvat Credit Rules requiring the manufacturer to reverse the cenvat credit taken on the inputs destroyed in the factory. The provision for reversal of cenvat credit came into effect .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X