TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1223X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a demand under Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 but the assessee did not heed it - Now they claim to have reversed the inadmissible credit for the period from 1.4.2008 at a belated stage –Assessee is clearing both dutiable and exempted final products - They could have refrained from taking CENVAT credit on the common input services if it was their case that the quantum of credit attribut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt, during the said period, cleared both dutiable and exempted final products without maintaining separate accounts in respect of common input services used in relation to the manufacture of the dutiable and exempted goods but at the same time availing CENVAT credit of the service tax paid on such services. From the impugned order, it appears that an amount of over Rs.16,00,000/- was worked out at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s for claiming the benefit of Section 73(1) of the Finance Act 2010. The learned counsel has also submitted that a major part of the impugned demand is beyond the normal period. It is submitted that, though there were a few audits conducted by the department, an objection was raised only at the time of the last audit. In the circumstances, the extended period of limitation was not liable to be inv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the common input services and reverse it so as to avert a demand under Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules 2004. The provisions prescribed a time limited for this, but the assessee did not heed it. Now they claim to have reversed the inadmissible credit for the period from 1.4.2008 at a belated stage. We are equally unimpressed with the submissions made by the learned counsel vis- -vis the dema ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
