Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 1727 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT Credit - exempt goods or not - removal of goods made by the assessee to the SEZ Developers - Since the respondent did not maintain separate records as provided under Rule 6(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and did not pay the amount equal to 10% of value of the exempted goods in terms of Rule 6(3) ibid - retrospective application of sub-rule (6) of Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 vide Notification No.50/08-C.E. (N.T.) dated 31.12.2008 - HELD THAT:- Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 deals with the situation of manufacture of dutiable as well as exempted goods - sub-rule (5) of Rule 6 ibid provided that the embargo created in sub-rule (1), subrule (2) and sub-rule (3) shall not be applicable, in case the goods are cleared to a unit in the Special Economic Zone. The said sub-rule (5) of Rule 6 was substituted by Notification No.50/08-C.E. (N.T.) dated 31.12.2008, wherein sub-rule (5) was renumbered as sub-rule (6). The effect of the amendment was that the developer of Special Economic Zone was inserted. Whether such amendment by way of substitution of Rule 6 would be applicable with retrospective effect or the same will be considered having prospective effect? - HELD THAT:- By considering the provisions contained in SEZ Act and the Rules, various judicial forums have held that the amendment made in Rule 6(6)(i) in 2008 has to be construed as retrospective in nature and the benefit of amendment should be extended to the goods cleared to a developer of SEZ for the authorized operations. There is no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the learned adjudicating authority - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.
|