TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 479X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Moreover, Section 6(3) of the Rules, on account of retrospective amendment to this Rule, also gives an option to a manufacturer to reverse the proportionate credit in respect of the connated inputs/ input services used in or in relation to the manufacture of exempted final products, which the appellant in this case have done. In fact, the proportionate credit comes only to ₹ 13,231/- against which the credit reversed is ₹ 88,756/-. We are therefore of the view that the impugned order is not sustainable and as such, the appellant have a strong prima facie case in their favour - The requirement of pre-deposit of the amount demanded under Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, interest thereon and penalty is, therefore, waived for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of the exempted final products, they would be liable to pay an amount @5%/10% of the sales value. On this basis, a show cause notice dated 31.1.2012 was issued to the appellant for demand of an amount of ₹ 66,90,857/- under Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules for the period 1.1.2007 to 31.11.2011 along with interest thereon under Section 11 AB and also for imposition of penalty under them under Rule 15(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11 AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The show cause notice was adjudicated by the Commissioner vide order-in-original dated 06/COMMR/GZB/2012-13 dated 31.03.2013 by which the above mentioned demand under Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules was confirmed against the appellant al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so gave an additional option to a manufacturer of reversing the proportionate credit based on a formula prescribed in this regard in the Rule, that since on this basis, proportionate credit works out to ₹ 13,231/- against which the appellant had already reversed ₹ 88,756/-, the option of paying 5% / 10% of the value of the exempted final product cannot be forced upon the appellant, that the impugned order is contrary to the provisions of the law and is not sustainable, that the appellant have a strong basis in their favour and that in view of this, the requirement of pre-deposit of the amount demanded under Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, interest thereon and penalty may be waived for hearing of the appeal and recovery the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vices, Management Consultancy and General Insurance Services in respect of which during the period of dispute, they have taken the cenvat credit of ₹ 2,28,376/-. The department's objection is that the appellant have not maintained separate accounts and inventory in respect of the use of these services in or in relation to the manufacture of dutiable and exempted final products and, therefore, the provisions of Rule 6(3) will become applicable and they would be liable to pay 5% / 10% of the sale value of the exempted final products. The view of the department and the impugned order based on the same is absurd, as even if the appellant want to maintain separate account in respect of the services mentioned above, it would be impossib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
