2019 (2) TMI 80

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s.61,48,422/- E/328/2009 Rs.52,61,321/- E/1169/2012 Rs.19,38,572/- E/1170/2012 Rs.07,34,631/- It transpires from the records that during the period in question, June 2006 to July 2008, appellant was functioning as a 100% EOU. In the EOU, appellant was manufacturing Iopamidol which was exported. For the manufacturing activity in the 100% EOU, appellant used to import various raw materials claiming exemption under customs duty as per Notification No. 21/2002-Cus, 22/2003-CE and 52/2003-Cus after executing required B-17 bond. During the period in question, appellant cleared Iopamidol to DTA claiming exemption from central excise duty under Notification No. 04/2006-CE dated 01.03.2006. After investigation, Revenue authorities were of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e consumed for manufacturing of goods cleared to DTA in cash. He would submit that decision of the larger Bench in the case of Vikram Ispat Vs CCE Mumbai [2000(120) ELT 800 (Tri-LB)] and the Apex Court in the case of CCE & C Vs Suresh Synthetics [2007(216) ELT 662(S.C)] will apply in its full force in their favour. 3. Learned A.R. after reiterating the findings of the lower authorities submits that Revenue is only demanding the amount of customs duty payable by the appellant in cash and not through debit in CENVAT account. It is his submission that there is no dispute as to the fact that the raw materials imported for consumption in the DTA and the final manufacture is exported as well as cleared locally. It is his submission that 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

..... removed as such; or (d) An amount under sub-rule (2) of Rule 16 of Central Excise Rules, 2002; or (e) Service tax on any output service; It can be seen from the relevant portions of the CENVAT credit Rules clearly indicate that the CENVAT credit cannot be utilised for payment of customs duty. 7. In the case in hand, Revenue authorities are correct in demanding the amount of customs duty, in cash, on the raw materials consumed for manufacture of finished goods which are cleared to DTA by claiming exemption. In our view, no provisions in the CENVAT Credit Rules permit the appellant herein to use the balance for discharging the customs duty on the imported goods 8. At the same time, learned counsel was correct in stating that if all the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X