9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 925X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... omic Zone (SEZ) and to SEZ Developers without payment of excise duty as per Rule 30 of the Special Economic Zone Rules, 2006 based on the Letter of Undertaking. 2.1 On enquiry by the Department, the appellant furnished the details of the volume of cement cleared by them to SEZ Developers and the cost of the same excluding taxes vide their letter dated 07.07.2009. It was noticed that the appellants had cleared 9871.65 MTS of Cement to the SEZ Developers valued at Rs. 3,68,01,263/- in all excluding taxes. It is the case of the Revenue that the appellant had contravened Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules (CCR), 2004 in as much as they had not discharged the liability of payment of 10% of the value of exempted goods cleared to the SEZ Develo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-III - 2016 (334) E.L.T. 104 (Tri. - Mum.); * Repro India Ltd. Vs. Union of India - 2009 (235) E.L.T. 614 (Bom.); 5. Per contra Ld. AR supported the findings of the authorities below. 6. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the documents placed on record and have also gone through the judgements referred to during the course of arguments. 7.1 On a careful consideration of the Order in the case of Fosroc Chemicals (India) Pvt. Ltd. (supra), we find that the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court after considering the rival contentions as well as the decisions of various judicial fora, has held that the amendment to Rule 6 vide Notification No. 50/2008 dated 31.12.2008 shall have ret ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le (6) of Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 the word "Developer" was conspicuously missing and only "unit" was included before the 2008 amendment. It is in that context the aforesaid amendment by Notification No. 50/2008 C.E. (N.T), dated 31-12-2008 was brought in, to clarify the doubt. As the said amendment is clarificatory in nature, that is the reason why it was brought by way of "substitution". The effect of the said "substitution" is that the Cenvat Rules 2004 are to be read and construed as if the altered words had been written into the Rules of 2004 with pen and ink and the words "to a developer of the SEZ for their authorized operation" was there from the inception. This is the understanding of the Government as is also clear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
