Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (5) TMI 1654 - AT - Central ExciseBenefit of exemption - scope of the term "site" - supply of PSC Slippers for Western Dedicated Freight Corridor (WDFC) Project - benefit of exemption applicable to goods manufactured at the site of construction - Benefit of N/N. 12/2012-CE dated 17.03.2012 - Interpretation of statute - Held that:- CBEC vide Circular dated 06.07.2016 clarified the scope of word “site” appearing in the N/N. 12/2012-CE. It is revealed from the said Circular dated 06.07.2016 that the representation have been made from the trade regarding the difficulties being faced in availing of benefit of exemption applicable to goods manufactured at the site of construction, for use in construction work at such site, vide Serial No. 186 of N/N. 12/2012-CE - The Board Circular was issued particularly for Project, which runs long distance such as construction of road, laying of pipeline, laying of railway track etc. The Board has clarified that the expression “site” cannot be given a restrictive manner and the benefit of the exemption under Serial No. 186 of the said Notification would be allowed, subject to fulfillment of condition, as laid down in the said circular. It is apparent on the face of record that the department directed the appellant to take registration and to pay the duty and also refused to grant exemption benefit. In this event, the findings of the Commissioner that the appellant was entitled to avail the benefit of exemption is not tenable, as it is altogether against evidence. The Order made in conscious violation of pleadings and law is a perverse Order, which is exactly happened in the present case and thus, such order cannot be sustained in the eye of law. Reversal of CENVAT credit - manufacturing of exempted goods - contravention of Rule 6(1) and 6(4) of Rules 2004 - Held that:- the issue was academic as the assessee was not seeking refund of duty and there was no need to reverse the credit of duty. Apart from that, the department once accepted the duty, it cannot deny the Cenvat Credit utilized for clearance of the said duty paid finished products. - When the department entertained the view during the relevant period that the appellant is not entitled to get the exemption benefit, Rule 6(1) and Rule 6 (4) of the Rules, 2004 cannot be invoked - Apart from that, the department once accepted the duty, it cannot deny the Cenvat Credit utilized for clearance of the said duty paid finished products. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|