9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 362X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not sustainable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. E/60510/2016-EX [SM] - Final Order No. 60526/2017 - Dated:- 15-12-2016 - Mr. Devender Singh, Member ( Technical ) Shri Surjeet Bhadu, Advocate for the Appellant Shri Satya Pal, A.R. for the Respondent ORDER Per Devender Singh The appellants are in appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No. JAL-EXCUS-000-APP-28-16-17 dated 29.07.2016 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Chandigarh-II. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Cotton Yarn and Synthetic Yarn falling under Chapter 52 55 of the Central Excise Tariff. During the course of audit, the Central Excise Authorities found ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interest is compensatory in nature and since the credit was not utilized for duty payment and just lying on the books and the finished goods were exempted, they were not liable to pay interest. In this regard, he relied upon the judgment of Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of C.C.E., Bangalore-I vs. Aravind Brands Ltd. 2011 (273) E.L.T. 239 (Kar.). 4. Ld. AR reiterated the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) and referred to the proviso of Notification No. 30/2004 ibid. 5. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 6.1 After hearing both the parties and examining the records, I find that the short issue in this appeal is whether interest was payable on the amount of cenvat credit which was contained in the inputs u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Therefore, it is submitted that in those circumstances, the assessee contended that he is not liable to pay interest. In spite of appreciating the said case, the Tribunal proceeded on a wrong assumption. But, however, in the end of the day, gave the relief to the assessee. The assessee could not have challenged the said order on that ground. 6.3 In the judgment of Himachal Futuristic Communications Ltd. (supra), it has been held that the appellants are not required to reverse the cenvat credit at the time of opting for exemption. In that scenario, the question of interest to be charged, on the amount which has actually been reversed, is not sustainable. 7. Following the above judgments of Hon ble Karnataka High Court and this Tribun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
