9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 521X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8109990 are dutiable under the Central Excise Tariff Act. Thus Rule 6(4) of CCR is not attracted. Thus, the show cause notice is mis-conceived. Further, it is rightly held that the appellant have rightly taken Cenvat credit on the capital goods. Credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Excise Appeal No. 51293 of 2019 - FINAL ORDER NO. 50597/2022 - Dated:- 12-7-2022 - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on removal of capital goods. Further, as per the ER-1 Returns, for the period April 2017 to June 2017, there was no production, nor any clearance. 3. It appeared to revenue that as the appellant was clearing their finished goods RCC pipes, for eligible project being Khan River Diversion Project of the Water Resources Department, Government of Madhya Pradesh, under Notification No. 12/2012 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er any notification. Accordingly, SCN dated 10th November 2017, was issued proposing to demand Cenvat credit Rs. 46,85,471/- alongwith interest and penalty was also proposed. 5. The SCN was adjudicated vide ex parte O-I-O dated 3rd January 2019, and the proposed demand was confirmed alongwith interest and equal amount of penalty under Rule 15(1) of CCR. Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvat credit. Further, admittedly there is no utilisation of such Cenvat credit, for removal of the finished goods. Admittedly, appellant have utilised or reversed such Cenvat credit for payment of duty on removal of capital goods. Thus, it amounts to reversal of Cenvat credit taken by the appellant, as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chandrapur Magnet Industries. Accordingly, he p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
