2020 (3) TMI 81

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... under Rule 6(3) of the CCR not followed - HELD THAT:- The issue decided in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, AHMEDABAD-II VERSUS MAIZE PRODUCTS [ 2008 (8) TMI 365 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD] where it was held that In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is apparent that the entire controversy has been decided by the Tribunal by merely remitting the matter back to the Ad .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... evenue has proposed solitary substantial question of law in its Memorandum of Appeal. The question formulated reads thus: "5(i) Whether subsequent reversal of credit, attributable to inputs used in the provision of exempted goods, with interest is sufficient to discharge the demand of amount @ 8% or 10% of the value of exempted goods if the assessee fails to maintained separate account as requir .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rer is required to maintain separate accounts regarding inputs used for manufacturing of dutiable products and inputs used for manufacturing of exempted products. However, sub-rule (3) stipulates that, in a case where the manufacturer opts not to maintain separate accounts, the manufacturer shall follow either condition (a) or condition (b), as the case may be. Under the Rule, Explanation-I provid .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X