9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1261X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... trospective amendment to this Rule, also gives an option to a manufacturer to reverse the proportionate credit in respect of the Cenvated inputs/input services used in or in relation to the manufacture of exempted final products, which the appellant in this case have done. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - APPEAL No. E/59035/2013-EX[DB] - A/70506/2019-EX[DB] - Dated:- 27-2-2019 - Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Request for Adjournment for Appellant Shri Shiv Pratap Singh (Dy. Commr.) AR for Respondent ORDER Per: Archana Wadhwa After rejecting the request for adjournment, we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tice dated 31/01/2012 was issued to the appellant for demand of an amount of ₹ 66,90,857/- under Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules for the period 01/01/2007 to 31/11/2011 alongwith interest thereon under Section 11AB and also for imposition of penalty under them under Rule 15(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11 AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The show cause notice was adjudicated by the Commissioner vide Order-in-Original No.06/COMMR./GZB/2012-13 dated 31/03/2013 by which the above mentioned demand under Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules was confirmed against the appellant alongwith interest and penalty of equal amount was also imposed on them. In course of hearing, the appellant pleaded that the retrosp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o ₹ 13,231/- against which the appellant had already reversed ₹ 88,756/-, the option of paying 5%/10% of the value of the exempted final product cannot be forced upon the appellant, that the impugned order is contrary to the provisions of the law and is not sustainable. 5. Shri Shiv Pratap Singh learned A.R. for the Revenue reiterated the findings of the Commissioner in the impugned order and emphasized that since the services of the Telecommunication, Chartered Accountant, General Insurance, Business Auxiliary Services and Management Consultancy Services were common services and no separate account and inventory in respect of these services regarding their use in the manufacture of the exempted final product and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Lex non cogit ad impossibilia is well settled legal principle and therefore, the option of maintaining separate account and inventory in respect of the services cannot be forced upon them. Moreover, Section 6(3) of the Rules, on account of retrospective amendment to this Rule, also gives an option to a manufacturer to reverse the proportionate credit in respect of the Cenvated inputs/input services used in or in relation to the manufacture of exempted final products, which the appellant in this case have done. In fact, the proportionate credit comes only to ₹ 13,231/- against which the credit reversed is ₹ 88,756/-. We are, therefore, of the view that the impugned order is not sustainable. Accordingly, the same is set aside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
