TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 812X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed that Sub-Rule (3) of Rule 11 of the Cenvat Credit Rules brought into force by N/N. 10/2007-CE w.e.f. 01.03.2007, and would be applicable prospectively. The impugned order is modified to the extent of upholding confirmation of the demands of Cenvat Credit of 83,665/- and ₹ 35,340/- and the demands of ₹ 15,81,781/- and ₹ 24,42,530/- are set-aside - appeal allowed in part. - Appeal No. E/608-609/2009 - Order No. 10994-10995/2018 - Dated:- 5-4-2018 - Dr. D. M. Misra, Hon'ble Member ( Judicial ) And Mr. Devender Singh, Hon ble Member ( Technical ) For the Appellant : Shri Anand Nainawati, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Sameer Chitkara, AR ORDER Per : Dr. D. M. Misra These two appeals are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e amounts, the appellants do not dispute the demands relating to Cess of ₹ 83,665/- and ₹ 35,340/- respectively. However, he submits that the confirmation of demands relating Cenvat credit of ₹ 15,81,781/- and ₹ 24,42,530/- lying in balance, as on the date of exercising option, under Notification No. 30/2004-CE, is contested being unsustainable in law. He submits that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) in confirming the order of the Adjudicating Authority observed that the appellants are required to reverse the credit lying in balance, as the said credit would lapse as per Rule 9 (2) of the CCR, 2002/2004. Also, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has also observed that the said, credit in any case, would lapse under Rule 11 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rules reads as follows:- Rule 9 (2) of CCR, 2002:- (2) A manufacturer who opts for exemption from the whole of the duty of excise leviable on goods manufactured by him under a notification based on the value or quantity of clearances in a financial year, and who has been taking CENVAT credit on inputs before such option is exercised, shall be required to pay an amount equivalent to the CENVAT credit, if any, allowed to him in respect of inputs lying in stock or in process or contained in final products lying in stock on the date when such option is exercised and after deducting the said amount from the balance, if any, lying in his credit, the balance, if any, still remaining shall lapse and shall not be allowed to be utilized fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Tribunal in OCM India Ltd s case (supra). This Tribunal after following the judgement of the Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCE, Bangalore-II vs. Gokaldas Intimate Wear-20111 (270) ELT 351 (kar.) observed that Sub-Rule (3) of Rule 11 of the Cenvat Credit Rules brought into force by Notification 10/2007-CE w.e.f. 01.03.2007, and would be applicable prospectively. It is observed as follows:- 5. It was pointed out to us that in the year 2008 (sic) sub-rule (3) was inserted by a Notification No. 10/2007 with effect from 1-3-2007, which reads as under :- (3) A manufacturer or producer of a final product shall be required to pay an amount equivalent to the CENVAT credit, if any, taken by him in respect of inputs received ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
