TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 590X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clearly says that the manufacturer assessee is entitled to clear the inputs or capital goods for export (on which credit has been taken) under bond without payment of duty - appellant has made out a strong case in their favour for grant of stay. Accordingly, we grant unconditional waiver from pre-deposit of the dues adjudged against the appellant and stay recovery thereof during the pendency of the appeal - Following decision of Videocon International Ltd. [2008 (7) TMI 275 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD] - Registry is directed to list the appeal for final hearing - Decided in favour of assessee. - E/87293/13 - - - Dated:- 12-11-2013 - P R Chandrasekharan And Anil Choudhary, JJ. For the Appellants : Shri V Sridharan, Sr. Adv., Ms Anjali Hirawa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l for the appellant submits that the CBE C vide Circular dated 31.12.1996 had clarified that the manufacturer, who has taken CENVAT Credit, can export the goods under bond without payment of duty and this facility was made available as per the excise procedure. Therefore, there is no bar for manufacturer to remove the inputs/capital goods in terms of the Explanation under sub-rule (2) of Rule 18. This clarification was reiterated in the Circular dated 29.08.2000 in the context of the Cenvat Credit Rules and it was made clear that the assessee who takes the credit can remove the inputs/capital goods on which the credit has been taken for export under bond. An identical issue had come up before the tribunal in the case of Videocon Internation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oved as such, the appellant has to reverse the credit and, therefore, in the case also, the appellant should reverse the credit. Therefore, the findings of the lower authorities are sustainable in law. He further pleads that since only stay is listed today, only stay petition can be considered. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides. 5.1 It is not in dispute that the capital goods imported by the appellant has been exported. On export of capital goods, the appellant is eligible for rebate of the duty paid thereon under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules or the appellant can export the goods without payment of duty under bond under Rule 19 of the said Rules. In respect of the goods on which credit has been ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
