Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 564 - CESTAT KOLKATASSI Exemption - removals were effected before granting Registration Certificate on 04.12.2006 - all the three consignments of finished goods were manufactured out of inputs on which no Cenvat Credit was taken - HELD THAT:- Appellant were availing the benefit of Notification 8/2003 dated 01.03.3003 and clearing the goods without payment of duty, as the value of clearance of goods manufactured by them in the Financial Year 2006-07was below the threshold limit of Rs 1.5 Crores. They took registration on 30.11.2006, but the Registration Certificate was received by them only on 04.12.2006. In the meantime, they started availing the credit. The present issue pertains the duty liability on 3 invoices dated 30.11.2006, 01.12.06 and 03.12.06. The Appellant cleared the goods under these three invoices without payment of duty as they were still availing the benefit of Notification 8/2003 dated 0103.2003. The Appellant was eligible for exemption of Notification 8/2003 dated 01.03.2203 as their value of clearances in the Financial year 2006-07 was much below the threshold limit of Rs 1.5 Crores. The Appellant claimed that they have taken Registration on 30.11.2006, but the Registration Certificate was received only on 04.12.2006. In the impugned order, central excise duty has been demanded on the two invoices dated 01.12.06 & 03.12.06, on the ground that they have started taking Cenvat credit w.e.f 01.12.2006 - It is observed that credit on stock of inputs lying in the factory as on the date of registration was admissible as per Para 5 of the Instruction contained in Ministry’s F. No. 345/2/2000-TRU dated 29.08.2000. Thus, duty cannot be demanded on the goods cleared vide invoices dated 01.12.06 & 03.12.06 only on the ground that they have availed Cenvat credit before that clearances. The demand confirmed in the impugned order is not sustainable. Since, demand of duty is not sustainable, the question of demanding interest and imposing penalty does not arise - the impugned order set aside - appeal allowed.
|