9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 960X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the adjudicating authority without verifying the said fact demanded the Cenvat of unutilsed balance while opting for exemption notification No. 30/2004-CE by invoking the Rule 11(3)(ii) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. From the careful reading of the Rule 11(3), it makes clear that the sub Rule (3)(i) covers the goods that are exempt conditionally whereas sub Rule (3)(ii) would apply to those goods to which exemption under Section 5A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is granted absolutely. The said rule provides that in any case, the Cenvat credit on stock of input lying in stock, in process and contained in finished goods needs to be reversed however, as regard the balance Cenvat credit after such reversal shall lapse only in a case where ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed Yarn and Grey Knitted Fabrics falling under the Chapter No. 54023300 and 699010000 respectively of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Appellant have opted for availing the benefit of notification No. 29/2004 CE dated 09.07.2004 and 30/2004 CE dated 09.07.2004 from 01.03.2011. The Appellant had retained Cenvat credit balances taken on inputs and lying in balance as on 01.03.2007 and they were of the view that the said balance would not lapse as they were availing benefit of both the aforementioned notifications simultaneously whilst maintaining separate records. 2. A show cause notice dated 31.03.2012 was issued to the appellant wherein, it was contended that the Cenvat credit balance amounting to Rs. 85,65,522/- carried forward ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that their case would not be covered by Rule 3(ii) and that the unutilized credit lying as on 31.03.2006 would not lapse. He further submits that the very issue involved in the present case is no longer res-integra as the same is covered by many judgments as cited below:- (a) Reliance Industries Ltd. vs. CCE 2012 (285) ELT 385 - CESTAT - Mumbai (b) Omkar Textile Mills Ltd. vs. CCE- 2006 (198) ELT 29-CESTAT-Mumbai (c) Shree Shyam Synthetics Limited. 2023 (4) TMI 916 (d) Ruia Rayon Pvt. Ltd Ors.- 2023 (1) TMI 882-CESTAT AHMEDABAD 4. Shri A.K Samota, learned Superintendent (AR) appearing on behalf of the revenue reiterates the finding of the impugned order. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions made b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for home consumption or for export, or for payment of service tax on any output service, whether provided in India or exported. (4) ...] 6. From the careful reading of the above Rule 11(3), it makes clear that the sub Rule (3)(i) covers the goods that are exempt conditionally whereas sub Rule (3)(ii) would apply to those goods to which exemption under Section 5A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is granted absolutely. The said rule provides that in any case, the Cenvat credit on stock of input lying in stock, in process and contained in finished goods needs to be reversed however, as regard the balance Cenvat credit after such reversal shall lapse only in a case where the exemption notification is absolute. In the present case, not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
