9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 826X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to the benefit of amended provision of Section 73 of the Finance Act, 2010 even if the appellant has not filed any application. The appellant is required to reverse proportionate cenvat credit in respect of input services used in the manufacture of exempted final products and for this purpose, I remand the case back to the original authority to verify whether the appellant has reversed the proportionate cenvat credit of input services attributable to exempted final products - appeal allowed by way of remand. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accounts for receipt, consumption and inventory of inputs used in the exempted goods were maintained, no such accounts were maintained in respect of input services. This indicated that the appellants had taken credit of input services attributable to the manufacture of exempted goods also. As such availment is contrary to provisions of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, a show-cause notice dt. 21/02/2008 was issued to the appellants demanding 10% of the value of the exempted goods cleared during the said period under the provisions of Rule6(3)(b) read with Rule 14 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and Section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944. Demand of interest under Section 11AB and penalties under Rules 15(3) were also raised. After following the due ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before this Tribunal. In this regard, the appellant has relied upon the decision in the case of CCE, Ahmedabad Vs. Maize Products [2008(88) RLT 211 (Guj.)] wherein the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat has held that where the reversal of cenvat credit was offered by the assessee at the stage of the appellate hearing in the Tribunal, the same would amount to non-availment of cenvat credit and therefore, 10% of the value of exempted goods is not payable. Further the learned counsel relied upon the decision in the case of Shree Rama Multi Tech Ltd. Vs. UOI [2011 (267) ELT 153 (Guj.)] wherein it was held that the assessee is entitled for the benefit of amended provision even in the absence of filing of an application within the period of six mo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pugned order asking the appellant to pay 10% / 5% of the value of exempted final products in terms of Rule 6(3)(b) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 is not sustainable in law. Further I hold that the appellant is required to reverse proportionate cenvat credit in respect of input services used in the manufacture of exempted final products and for this purpose, I remand the case back to the original authority to verify whether the appellant has reversed the proportionate cenvat credit of input services attributable to exempted final products. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of by way of remand. The original authority will pass a reasoned order after following the principles of natural justice.
(Order pronounced on 3/11/2017) X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
