9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 402X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ENVAT credit on the inputs, capital goods and input services. The final products manufactured by appellant were also cleared to various organisations of Government of India, without payment of duty by claiming exemption under notification No.10/1997-CE and No. 64/1995-CE. During the course of audit, it was noticed that the respondent had not maintained separate accounts for the inputs and input services utilized for manufacturing exempted goods, accordingly, the revenue authorities felt that respondent is required to pay an amount equivalent to 8% or 10% of the value of the goods cleared by claiming exemption. After recording various statements of the individuals, a show cause notice dated 13.06.2008 was issued demanding such an amount for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... td is also incorrect as the issue involved in that case is different. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the issue is no more res integra. By a retrospective amendment, the provisions of Rule 6 (3) were amended which extends an opportunity to the manufacturer of the goods to reverse the amount equivalent to the CENVAT credit attributable to inputs or input services, that for the period prior to 01.04.2008, assessees can do so by producing a Chartered Accountant's Certificate to that extent and should pay off the amount along with interest with six months of enactment. 5. On careful consideration of the submissions made, we find that the demand is for an amount equivalent to 8% or 10% of the value of the goods cle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cified in sub-rule (3A)." 7. It can be seen from the above reproduced provisions that Rule 6 (3) (ii) very clearly indicates that a manufacturer needs to reverse only the CENVAT credit attributable to the inputs and input services used in or in relation to the goods which are manufactured and cleared claiming exemption. In the case in hand, there is no dispute, as recorded earlier, that respondent had reversed the CENVAT credit on the inputs and input services attributable to the exempted goods cleared by them (recorded in impugned order). 8. The adjudicating authority in the case in hand has correctly followed the legislation which was retrospectively amended in 2013 wherein it is indicated that provisions of Rule 6 (3) (as reproduced h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
