Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2021 (7) TMI 1351

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... te of duty nor exempt from payment of duty under exemption notification. That anomaly under rule 6 (6)(i) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was duly removed when the said clause 6(6)(i) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was substituted and SEZ developers were also treated on the same footing as SEZ units. In various judgments which have been relied upon by the learned Advocate it has been clearly laid down that the said substituted rule is clarificatory in nature and, therefore, would have retrospective effect from the date when Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 were brought into force - reliance can be placed in the case of SUJANA METAL PRODUCTS LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., HYDERABAD [ 2011 (9) TMI 724 - CESTAT, BANGALORE] . Time Limitation - HE .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... art from selling Mild Steel Rounds and TMT Bar to independent buyers etc, they also exported 20457.34 MT of Mild Steel Rounds and TMT Bar to different SEZ developers without payment of duty. 2. A show cause notice dated 13-10-2010 was issued to the Appellant on the ground that the said clearance was in violation of provisions of Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 without payment of duty in terms of Rule 30 of Special Economic Zones Rules, 2006, as amended, by issuing ARE-1s under self sealing and self certification with remarks Export to SEZ . It was alleged that they did not maintain separate accounts for common inputs on which Cenvat credit was availed by them, as required under Rule 6(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 for manuf .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s under which the TMT bars were cleared to different SEZ Developers by following the aforementioned procedure. He also drew our attention to Rule 6(6) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 which during the material period, inter alia, provided that the provisions of Rule 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 shall not be applicable in case the excisable goods removed without payment of duty to a unit in a special economic zone. The Ld. Advocate also submitted that rule 6(6)(i), of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was substituted vide Notification No. 50/2008-CE (NT) dated 31-12-2008 wherein instead of the expression cleared to a unit in a special economic zone the same was substituted with cleared to a unit in a special economic zone or to a developer of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t the demand is barred by limitation as they were following procedure as laid down under CBEC circular No. 29/2006-Cus dated 27-12-2006. In support of his submission he has relied upon para 12 of the judgment in the case of Sujana Metal Products Ltd Vs. CCE, Hyderabad reported in 2011 (273) ELT 112 (Tri.Bang) wherein it has been held that as the issues involved relate to interpretations of SEZ provisions under the Customs Act, SEZ Act and provisions of the Central Excise Rules and the Cenvat Credit Rules, no charge of suppression by the assessee can be sustained and therefore, there was no occasion of invoking the extended period of limitation and also imposing penalties. This judgment of the Tribunal has been upheld by the Andhra Pradesh H .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lar No. 29/2006-Cus dated 27-12-2006, and such clearances were well within the knowledge of the department. In the case of Sujana Metal Products Ltd Vs. CCE, Hyderabad reported in 2011 (273) ELT 112 (Tri.Bang), which has been upheld by the Hon ble Andhra Pradesh High Court, this Tribunal apart from setting aside the duty demand on the very same issue on merits also set aside the duty demand on the ground of limitation. In view of the above, the duty demand, demand of interest and imposition of equal amount of penalty is neither sustainable on merits nor on the ground of limitation. We therefore set aside the impugned Order and allow the appeal with consequential relief as per law. (Operative part of the order was pronounced in the ope .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates