2017 (1) TMI 354

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as reversed the entire amount of Cenvat credit attributable to the inputs lying in stock as on 31-3-2006 albeit belatedly, for which, the Department could have charged interest on the respondent. Since in the facts and circumstances of this case, the amount of Cenvat credit availed on the inputs lying in stock as on 31-3-2006 stands reversed, we do not find any merit in the appeal filed by the Rev .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... fit of exemption Notification No. 8/2003-C.E., dated 1-3-2003. It is the case of the Revenue that the respondent should have paid duty on the inputs, which were lying in stock as on 31-3-2006, which amounts to ₹ 1,05,310/- while they have reversed only ₹ 28,157/-, which was lying in credit in their RG-23A Part-II Account. It is the submission that the provisions of Rule 11(2) of Cenvat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd circumstances of this case, the amount of Cenvat credit availed on the inputs lying in stock as on 31-3-2006 stands reversed, we do not find any merit in the appeal filed by the Revenue. 7. We find that the provisions of Rule 11(2) mandate for reversal of the Cenvat credit in stock as on the date on which the benefit of Notification No. 8/2003-C.E. is sought by the assessee. 8. In view of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X