9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 863X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They also consumed relays captively in the manufacture of control panels. They did not pay excise duty on goods which were captively consumed and claimed exemption under Notification No.67/95-CE dt. 16.03.1995 as amended. The control panels were cleared for home consumption on payment of duty and also were cleared without payment of duty by availing exemption under Notification No.6/2006-CE dt. 01.03.2006. The department was of the view that the appellants are not eligible for exemption under Notification No.67/95-CE on the intermediate goods captively consumed and have to pay excise duty on the relays/ control panels cleared for captive consumption. Two show cause notices were issued to demand duties for t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No.6/2006 whereby the appellant had claimed exemption from payment of excise duty and has also not paid an amount 10% as provided for under Rule 6 (6) of CCR 2004. The meaning of the term 'discharging the obligation' is to subject a transaction in question to the provisions of Rule 6 of CCR 2004. Therefore, the fact as to whether the person pays 10% or not is irrelevant or immaterial since Rule 6 specifically provides for certain exceptions to payment of an amount of 10% subject to fulfilment of certain conditions. It is submitted that the confirmation of demand by the Department is fallacious. The issue stands covered in the appellant's own case as reported in 2019-TIOL-1265-CESTAT-MAD. The Tribunal in the said case followed the decision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee cleared the control panels availing exemption to Mega Power Projects. For such exemption, the appellant-assessees have complied with the provisions of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. They are falling under the category of clause (vii) of Rule 6 (6) (vii). It is apparent that the provisions of Rule 6 with reference to reversal of credit or payment on a fixed percentage amount on the value of the exempted goods have no application to the facts of the present case. The appellant-assessee is covered by clause (vii) of the said Rules. This, which has been admitted in the original order dated 26.12.2008. In fact, the original authority categorically recorded that the Rule prescribing the obligation is not applicable to the clearance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
