9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 219X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 68 (2) of the Finance Act 1994 under the category of 'Transportation of Goods by Road Services'. The respondents exported Iron Ore Fines and Lumps falling under Chapter Heading 26.01 of CETA and accordingly filed refund claim for Rs. 2,55,77,824/- (Rupees Two Crore Fifty Five Lakhs Seventy Seven Thousand Eight Hundred and Twenty Four only) with the Assistant Commissioner, Bellary Division in terms of Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 filed on various input services used for manufacture and export of Iron Ore Fines for the period April 2006 to March 2007. The Assistant Commissioner issued the show-cause notice dated 28.09.2007 to the respondent proposing to reject the entire refund on the ground that the goods manufactured and exported b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... specific entry under Heading No. 2601 of CETA they were to be termed as 'excisable goods' and they were allowed to be cleared at 'nil' rate of duty by virtue of exemption contained under Notification No. 4/2006-CE dated 01.03.2006. Further the Commissioner (Appeals) has also held that as per Notification No. 36/2001 CE dated 26.06.2001 there was no requirement for the respondent to have obtained Central Excise registration in terms of Rule 9 of Central Excise Rules since the goods manufactured by them were chargeable to 'nil' rate of duty. He further submitted that once the goods are excisable goods which are exempted by way of a Notification, then there was no requirement for the respondent to have obtained registration certificate under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ail credit of service tax paid on input services when they are producing exempted excisable goods which are chargeable to 'nil' rate of duty. Further we find that the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs Vs. ANZ International cited supra it has been held that the provisions of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules are not applicable when the goods are exported under bond. The High Court judgment has been maintained by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and followed by the CESTAT, Bangalore in the Final Order No. 22062/2017 dated 18.09.2017 in the case of Commr. of Central Excise Vs. Vibhutigudda Mines Pvt. Ltd. Further we find that the ratio of the CESTAT decision rendered in the case of Punjab Stainless Steel Industries Vs. C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
