9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1175X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... THAT:- The show cause notice, in this case, covers two different periods substantial part of that period was when Rule 6(3A) did not exist. During this time, adjudicating authorities were bound to follow the rule while granting inputs credit in respect of services that qualify for it, even while excluding the credit for noneligible services and activities. All that Rule 6(3A) has done is to streamline the procedure for apportioning credits to ensure that proportionate credit, to the extent admissible could be claimed for the business and ensure that the concerned adjudicating officers do not have to spend time on carrying out the exercise. The amendment i.e. procedure for apportionment under sub-rule 3(A) was facilitative and proce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... various widths and sizes as inputs for use in the manufature of their final product during the period from July,2011 to March, 2016. In some cases, the quantity of inputs were either cleared as such or after undertaking the process of cutting/slitting on 14.11.2013, the assessee obtained registration as a dealer and thereafter, cleared the inputs on reversal of the credit under Rule 3(5) of the Cenvant Credit Rules. The trading was included as an exempted service w.e.f. 1.4.2011 or inputs cleared as such was done on reversal of proportionate credit of inputs services attributable to such trading activity as per Rule 6(3)(iii) of the Cenvat Credit Rules. The show cause notice was issued to the assessee alleging that the common input service ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an activity of trading and all consequences of specifying trading as an exempted service (w.e.f. 01.04.2011) will follow. It is seen that Rule 6(3)(i) has been amended w.e.f. 01.06.2015 providing for reversal of 7% of the value of exempted service. The period involved in the present case is from July, 2011 to March, 2016. The requirement of reversal of an amount under Rule 6(3)(i) including the value of exempted service i.e. trading will arise only after the date of such amendment. For the period prior to 01.04.2015, there is no requirement of reversal of credit @ 7% of exempted service. This position has been clarified by the CBEC vide their Circular dated 7.12.2015. Hence, we are of the view that for the period prior to 01.04.2015 there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs, (2011) 1 SCC 236 and the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Nicholas Piramal (India) Ltd. 2009 (244) ELT 321 (Bom.) . 6. At the outset, this Court notices that the CESTAT has finally remitted the matter for fresh verification in terms of its order. 7. In short, the revenue s argument is that Rule 6(3A) is not merely procedural but was binding upon the assessee, who could not have claimed the benefit of even proportionate credit or it would have otherwise been entitled to inputs service for which Cenvat Credit was admissible, without following the procedure. This Court is of the opinion that the CESTAT order cannot be faulted. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
