Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2018 (2) TMI 1793

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... soned order. - APPEAL No. E/70475/2016-EX[SM] - A/72452/2018-SM[BR] - Dated:- 2-2-2018 - Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) Shri Siddharth Tewari (Advocate) Shri Sharad Chandra Tewari (Consultant) for Appellants Shri Sandeep Kumar Singh (Dy. Commr.) AR for Respondent ORDER Per: Anil Choudhary The issue in this appeal is: Whether the appellants, engaged both in the manufacturing and trading during the period 2011 12 and 2012 13, are required to reverse any amount under Rule 6(3)(i) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004? 2. The brief facts of the case are that, as per the show cause notice dated 27/11/2014, the appellants manufacture and clear products like PU Foam Sheet, Mattress, Spring Mattress etc. They are .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... it. They further stated that their unit did not avail Cenvat credit on any input services for the period in question, because their unit did not avail such credit, which can be considered as also utilized for trading services. The view of the appellant was not found acceptable to Revenue as they had not maintained separate accounts in terms of Rule 6(2) 6(3) of CCR, 2004. Accordingly, the SCN proposed to demand ₹ 6,49,463/- with further proposal to appropriate the same as already reversed and further to demand interest with proposal to appropriate from the amount already paid for by appellant was also proposed. 3. The SCN was adjudicated as the appellants failed to submit any reply, nor appeared on the date fixed i.e. 16 th Febr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... roportionate Cenvat credit as permissible under Rule 6(1), and as such the provision of Rule 6(3) were not attracted. Similar view was taken by the Division Bench of this Tribunal in the case of MIRC Electronics Ltd. vs. CCE, 2015 (38) STR 199 (Tri.-Mum). Accordingly, in the interest of Justice, I set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal by way of remand to the Adjudicating Authority, who shall after hearing the appellant pass a reasoned order, in accordance with law. 9. The appellant is also directed to appear before the Adjudicating Authority with a copy of their reply and evidences they want to rely upon and seek an opportunity of hearing, within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (Dictat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates