9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 380X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ovision of Rule 6(3)(b) is applicable only in case when the appellant availed the cenvat credit. However in the facts of the present case Rule 6(3)(b) has no application - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - E/1189/07 & E/CO/231/07 - A/86575-86576/17/SMB - Dated:- 30-3-2017 - Shri Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial) Shri M.R. Melvin, Supdt. (AR) for the appellant Ms. Vibha Sachde, Manager, Excise of the respondent ORDER The respondent of the case is that the respondent are engaged in the manufacture of tractor falling under CSH 8701 1700 and motor vehicle parts including Hydraulic Vary Touch Unit (HVTU) falling under CSH 8708 1010. In terms of notification 23/04 dated 09.07.2004 (sr. No.295 and 296) goods falling ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ime of clearance of exempted goods it is as if the appellant have not availed the cenvat credit therefore rule 6(3)(b) is not applicable. He also relied upon the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Chandrapur Magnet 1996 (81) ELT 3(SC). Being aggrieved by the Order-in-Appeal the revenue is before me. 2. Shri M.R. Melvin, Ld. Supdt. (AR) appearing for the revenue reiterates the findings in the impugned order. he further submits that as per Rule 6(3), the only option is either assessee should maintain separate account and do not avail cenvat credit on the inputs used in the manufacture of exempted goods or to pay an amount equal to 8%/ 10% on the price of the exempted goods. In the present case the respondent has not maintained a separat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it was reversed. In this situation, it is the case as if the cenvat credit was not availed by the respondent. Provision of Rule 6(3)(b) is applicable only in case when the appellant availed the cenvat credit. However in the facts of the present case Rule 6(3)(b) has no application. The ld. Commissioner has given a categorical finding for allowing the appeal of the respondent. From the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) which is based on the Supreme Court judgment in case of Chandrapur Magnet (supra) and taking into consideration the fact that the appellant have reversed the credit, I do not find any infirmity therein. Moreover, this Tribunal in the respondent's own case vide order dated 01.02.2008 passed the following order:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
