9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 518X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 34 - HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT], wherein it was held that CENVAT credit is admissible even if the raw material is utilized in the manufacture and export of exempted goods. Hon'ble Apex Court in COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHANDIGARH VERSUS M/S DRISH SHOES LTD. [2016 (7) TMI 1415 - SC ORDER] the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh in the case of M/s Drish Shoes. The principle adopted by the Hon'ble Courts was that goods are to be exported and not the taxes. Learned Authorized Representative for the appellant-Revenue submits that, learned Commissioner should not have relied upon M/s Drish Shoes Ltd. as the SLP filed by the Revenue against the order of the Hon'ble High Court was pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court. Hon' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... preferred by the respondents, Commissioner (Appeals) vide impugned order dated 26.09.2012 set aside the original order and held that the refund is required to be granted to the appellants. Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order. 2. Learned Authorized Representative for the Revenue reiterates the grounds of appeal and submits that learned Commissioner has erred in granting the refund on the basis of the judgment of Drish Shoes Ltd. - 2010 (254) ELT 417 (HP) as the Special Leave Petition No.4553/2011, filed by the Revenue, is pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court; during the relevant period, the final product menthol was exempted from Central Excise Duty in terms of Notification No.04/2006 as amended by Notification No.04/2008 dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s observed as follows: 13. The only ground for denial of refund, according to the impugned order, was that some of the DIMO used for the manufacture of export goods, i.e, menthol, was contained in the recoverable waste, which had arisen during the process of manufacture of those goods. To the extent the DTMO was contained in such waste, which had not been exported, refund claim attributable to the Cenvat of such inputs was, according to the adjudicating authority, not admissible to them. 14. I do not agree to the reasoning of the adjudicating authority. The language of the Rule 5 and also Notification No. 5/2006 supra is unambiguous and it cannot be read down to insert a condition that is not there either in the Rule or in the Notifica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in any intermediate of the final product even if such intermediate is exempt from payment of duty. The basic idea is that CENVAT credit is admissible so long as the inputs are used in or in relation to the manufacture of final products, and whether directly or indirectly. 17. There is no finding recorded in the impugned orders as to how the recoverable waste in question had been used or cleared by the appellant. In any case that issue is totally independent of the claims for refund and could not determine the admissibility of those claims. The contention of the appellant, therefore, that the refund of whole of the duty paid on inputs used in the manufacture of exported goods is admissible irrespective of the fact that some waste is gen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
