TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 500X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pted goods is held as payable in respect of clearances of the reprocessed granules, this amount would be adjustable against the amount already paid towards duty, which is much more than the amount demanded under Rule 6(3)(i) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Tribunal in the case of CCE v. Yamuna Gases & Chemicals Ltd. (2011 (7) TMI 984 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI) has held that such adjustment is permissible. - Stay granted. - E/2461/2011 - Stay Order No. 462/2012-EX(BR)(PB) - Dated:- 13-3-2012 - Ajit Bharihoke and Rakesh Kumar, JJ. Shri C. Willingdon, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri S.R. Meena, DR, for the Respondent. ORDER The facts giving rise to this appeal and stay application, in brief, as under. 1.1 The appellant manu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (reprocessed plastic granules) and separate account and inventory of the inputs meant for dutiable and exempted goods has not been maintained as per the provisions of Rule 6(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, the appellant would be required to pay an amount equal to 10% of the value of plastic granules cleared under Rule 6(3)(i) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. On this basis, a show cause notice dated 17-3-2010 was issued to the appellant for - (a) recovery of an amount of Rs. 28,66,729/- from the appellant under Rule 6(3)(i) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 along with interest; (b) treating the duty of Rs. 46,20,507/- as deposit and (c) imposition of penalty on the appellant under Rule 15 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the amount already paid as duty, that such adjustment is very much permissible in terms of judgment of the Tribunal in the case of CCE v. Yamuna Gases Chemicals Ltd. reported in 2011 (271) E.L.T. 209 (T), and that in any case, the whole issue boils down to a revenue neutral exercise, because firstly the appellant have paid much higher amount as duty on reprocessed granules, which the department does not want to treat as duty, but would still retain as deposit and secondly even if the appellant are called upon to deposit 10% of the value of reprocessed granules, the same would be very much available as Cenvat credit to their Halol unit for utilisation towards payment of duty on their final product. He, therefore, pleaded that the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ispute about the fact that in respect of clearances of plastic granules to their Halol unit, the appellant have paid duty @ 16% adv. Even if the Revenue s contention is accepted and the goods are treated as fully exempt from duty under Notification No. 4/2006-C.E. (Sl. No. 78) and, hence, exempted goods within the meaning of this term as defined under Rule 2(d) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and on this basis an amount equal to 10% of the value of the exempted goods is held as payable in respect of clearances of the reprocessed granules, this amount would be adjustable against the amount already paid towards duty, which is much more than the amount demanded under Rule 6(3)(i) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Tribunal in the case of CCE v. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
