Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2015 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (9) TMI 925 - AT - Central ExciseReversal of Cenvat Credit - Final product become exempt subsequently - inputs lying in stock when the Retail Computer System became exempted by Notfn No.23/2004 dt. 9.7.2004 - Held that:- During the relevant period there is no specific provision in CCR for recovery of cenvat credit on the inputs lying in stock when the final product became exempted fully. Only from 1.3.2007 a specific sub-rule (3) of Rule 11 of CCR was inserted making specific provision where a manufacture is required to pay amount equal to the cenvat credit taken on inputs lying in stock if the final product became fully exempted. The Revenue relied on Tribunal's decisions in the case of Albert David Ltd. Vs CCE (2002 (11) TMI 144 - CEGAT, COURT NO. III, NEW DELHI) and Explicit Trading & Marketing (P) Ltd. Vs Commissioner (2009 (3) TMI 978 - SUPREME COURT). Both the decisions were upheld by Supreme Court [2003 (3) TMI 709 - SUPREME COURT]. I am fully aware of the fact that this Tribunal Bench also upheld the reversal of credit in the case of CCE Vs M/s.Annapoorna Re-rolling Mills (P) Ltd. (2011 (8) TMI 1093 - CESTAT CHENNAI) - The ratio of the High Court of Madras order [2014 (12) TMI 905 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] is squarely applicable to the present case as the appellant availed the credit on inputs when the final product was dutiable and there was no one to one correlation and the final product was exempted vide Notfn 23/2004-CE dt. 9.7.2004 and the sub-rule (3) of Rule 11 of CCR came into effect from 1.3.2007 onwards and cannot be applied retrospectively. - impugned order confirming the demand on credit already taken on inputs lying in stock when the finished goods i.e. computers became exempted on 9.7.2004 is liable to be set aside - Decided in favour of assessee.
|