9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 1044X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of said section, it is clear that in case of any dutiable goods became exempted, the assessee is required to reverse the cenvat credit in respect of inputs lying in stock or in process or is contained in the final product as of date of opting for the exemption notification. In terms of above specific provision, the appellant is required to reverse the credit attributed to inputs as such, in process, contained in finished gods, therefore, the appellant have mistakenly reversed 5% in terms of Rule 6(3)(i) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. As per the specific provision particularly in a case that the goods which were earlier dutiable and at interim stage became exempted, the provision which predominantly apply is Rule 11(3) of Cenvat Credit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... falling under chapter 37. Their final product viz. Colour Positive unexposed cinematographic film and roll was exempted from whole of excise duty vide Notification No.33/2011-CE dated 25.06.2011. The appellant reversed cenvat credit of Rs. 3,24,664/- vide entry No.491/492/495/496 dated 27.06.2011 from their RG 23A Part II account towards amount equal to 5% of the value of the exempted clearances made on 27.06.2011, in terms of Rule 6(3)(i) of CCR. Subsequently, the appellant reversed total amount of duty of Rs. 5,41,069/- vide entry No. 525/524 dated 01.07.2011 from their R.G.23A part II account against the raw material in their stock and chose the second option of non-payment of duty and to maintain separate account as provided in Rule 6 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t complying the said rule, reversed the cenvat credit of Rs. 5,41,069/- on the stock of exempted goods lying on 25.06.2011 which also includes the clearances made on 27.06.2011, therefore, the reversal made in terms of Rule 6 was rightly liable to be re-credit/ refunded. Therefore, the order-in-original as well as order-in-appeal are incorrect and illegal which need to be set aside and appeal be allowed. 3. Shri R.K. Agarwal, Learned Superintendent (Authorized Representative) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. He also relied on the Board Circular No. 868/6/2008-CX dated 09.05.2008 and submitted that once the assessee availed the option under Rule 6(3), the same cannot be withdrawn during the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation. In terms of above specific provision, the appellant is required to reverse the credit attributed to inputs as such, in process, contained in finished gods, therefore, the appellant have mistakenly reversed 5% in terms of Rule 6(3)(i) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. On realising this mistake they have reversed Rs. 5,41,069/- on the input, in process, and contained in the finished goods by following the Rule11(3) they have corrected the mistake, therefore, the amount @ 5% of exempted finished goods reversed by the appellant became excess reversal, hence the same is liable to be recredited/ refunded to the appellant. The contention of both the lower authorities as well as the submission of the learned Authorized Representative is that onc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
