9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 699X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of receipt of the service. Hence there is no obligation on the part of the manufacturer to reverse credit in input services at the time of debonding from 100% EOU scheme - demand of reversal of input services not justified - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/3961/2010-EX.(SM) - 56381/2016 - Dated:- 22-12-2016 - Mr. V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) Ms. Sukriti Das, Advocate - for the appellant Shri Dharam Singh, D.R. - for the respondent ORDER Per V. Padmanabhan The present appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal dated 11.10.2010 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Jaipur. 2. The appellant is engaged in manufacture of cotton yarns and knitted fabrics of cotton falling under Chapters 52 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... visions of Rule 6(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, since the said provision does not allow credit on such quantity of inputs/input services, which is used in manufacture of exempted final products or exempted services. After considering the submissions of the appellant, the ld. Deputy Commissioner vide order-in-original dated 30.10.2009, dropped the proceedings emanating from the impugned SCN. However, upon review and filing of appeal by Department to Commissioner (Appeals), the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) vide order-in-appeal dated 1.10.2010, reversed the findings of the ld. Deputy Commissioner and upheld the allegations contained in the impugned Show Cause Notice by confirming and disallowing Cenvat credit of ₹ 1,83,783/- along w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it of input service has been taken properly. The fact that subsequently the unit started availing exemption under Notification No. 30/2004 cannot be a reason for the department to insist on reversal of the credit taken on input services. 5. Ld. DR reiterated the impugned order. 6. It is on record that on the date of de-bonding, on 16th May 2008, the appellant has reversed the duty payable on capital goods, inputs and inputs contained in work in progress. However, the credit availed on input services was not reversed. Revenue has taken the view that since the appellant has cleared the manufactured goods under exemption No. 30/2004 from the date of de-bonding, the credit taken on input services must be reversed. 7. In terms of Cenvat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
