9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (6) TMI 222X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thereof. In absence of any evidence about separate records to be maintained by appellant during the period of dispute it is absolutely clear that the appellant was not maintaining the separate accounts of inputs/input services despite manufacturing dutiable as well as exempted goods, however, were availing the cenvat credit on the common inputs, which definitely amounts violation of Rule 6 of CCR, 2004. Appeal dismissed. - Excise Appeal No. 50400 of 2019 - Final Order No. 51595/2019 - Dated:- 24-10-2019 - Mr. P V Subba Rao, Member (Technical) And Ms. Rachna Gupta, Member (Judicial) For the Appellant : Shri Madhu Sudan, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri H C Saini, Authorised Representative ORDER RACHNA GUPTA: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e company. Learned Counsel has brought to our notice that the Department itself got a verification report in this respect. The order No. 25/2015 dated 18.03.2014 of Assistant Commissioner in an appeal with respect to a show Cause Notice for subsequent period has been impressed upon wherein aforesaid verification report has been acknowledged. It is submitted that the demand for subsequent period has been dropped based on the said verification report as is apparent from the said order No. 25. Therefore, present demand also is prayed to be dropped by setting aside the order under challenge. The appeal is, accordingly, prayed to be allowed. 4. While rebutting these arguments, it is submitted on behalf of the Department that there is an appar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for both the said goods. Rule 6(1) of CCR 2004 clarifies that if inputs/ input services are used in manufacture of exempted goods as well as dutiable goods, credit cannot be allowed except in the circumstances as mentioned in sub-Rule 2 of Rule 6 of CCR i.e. the maintaining of separate accounts with respect to dutiable as well as exempted goods/service. Though learned Counsel has placed reliance upon a verification report as was obtained by the Department itself acknowledging the maintenance of separate accounts by the appellant for both kind of goods/service. But it is observed that said report was sought by the adjudicating authority while adjudicating a different Show Cause Notice as was served upon the appellant for the similar demand b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rse of arguments, the learned Counsel submits that the entire amount was reversed, but the adjudicating authority has not taken any cognizance. When it is so, then we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the original authority to decide the issue afresh, but by providing a reasonable opportunity to the assessee-Appellants to present their case with liberty to file additional documents, if any, as per law. Thus, it was admitted that the reversal of credit was voluntary and the matter was remanded only to verify as to whether the entire amount has been reversed or not. 7. Now from perusal of the order under challenge which is passed in compliance of the said Final Order, it is observed that the adjudicating authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
