9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 401X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IL CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL). Shri V. K. Shastri, Asst. Commissioner (A.R.) for the Appellant. Shri Amit Awasthi, Advocate for the Respondent. ORDER Per Mr. Anil Choudhary : The revenue is in appeal against order of the Commissioner (Appeals) by which it has been held that iron ore pellets and fines, which are less than 3 mm size and get separated on the conveyor belt in the process of charging in the furnace, the appellant is not required to reverse input credit under rule 3(5B) of CCR, 2004. 2. SCN was issued as it appeared to revenue that in the process of charging of iron ore pellets in the blast furnace, the pallets of less than 3 mm size fines get separated and are not charged in the furnace which are colle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... right from the day of manufacturing process during its generation, are now being cleared as generated waste on payment of Cenvat. 3. No demand has been issued for the subsequent period. In this regard, the assessee had informed vide letter dated 30.05.2013 that since August, 2012, no pellet fines have been generated in the process. 4. The assessee vide his letter dated 29.09.2015 informed that presently they are getting good quality iron ore pellets and fines are being generated during the process and entire iron ore pellets is being used in the manufacturing of sponge iron. Accordingly, the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) recorded the findings based on the report of the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise Division, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the activity carried out on the work in progress (WIP), cannot be considered as amounting to manufacture, in that case, the said goods should be considered as input and treatment for reversal of credit applicable to input would be applicable. As the appellant have not reversed the Cenvat credit under the provisions of Rule 3(5B) of CCR, 2004, read with Circular No. 907/27/2009 CX dated 7/12/09, the order in original demanding duty and penalty, is justified and the impugned appellate order be set aside. 6. Heard the parties. 7. Having considered the rival contention, I find that the condition precedent under Rule 3(5B) of CCR, 2004 is, if the value of any inputs/goods have been written off fully or partially or where any provision to w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
