Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2016 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (11) TMI 914 - AT - Central ExciseDemand was made under Rule 6(3) (1) at the rate of 10% of the value of the goods - M/s. Bajaj Holding & Investment Ltd. is not a SEZ Developers but it is a contractor, - Held that: - From the letter of the Department of Commerce, it is clear that the M/s. Bajaj Holding & Investment Ltd. is an SEZ Developer. Moreover, while making an allegation in the show cause notice that the appellant is contractor, no material evidence was adduced by the department that whether the M/s. Bajaj Holding & Investment Ltd. is contractor or SEZ Developer. This Tribunal in the case of Ultratech Cement Ltd. [2014 (8) TMI 655 - CESTAT MUMBAI] held that even if the buyer is contractor of SEZ unit or developer. Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules cannot be made applicable for demanding 10% of the value of the goods supplied to SEZ. As per the above discussion, I am of the considered view that demand of 10% confirmed and upheld by the lower authorities is not sustainable. The impugned order is set aside and appeal is allowed.
|