TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 93X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner on 4.11.2010 by the appellant. - Since the adjudicating authority has accepted the application of the appellant relating to the demand covered in four show-cause notices and held that the appellant has not availed MODVAT/CENVAT credit on the crates used for exempted goods and held that there is no further demand due from the appellant. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside - Decided in favour of assessee. - E/EH/40073/2015 & E/323/2008 - Final Order No. 40959 / 2015 - Dated:- 6-8-2015 - Shri R. Periasami, Technical Member and Shri P. K. Choudhary, Judicial Member, JJ. For the Petitioner : Shri V. Panchanathan, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Paneerselvam, AC (AR) ORDER Per R. Periasami Revenue ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccepted their intimation. 5. Learned AR reiterates the findings and submits that the Commissioners letter was issued after filing the early hearing application. 6. Heard both sides and perused the records. 7. After hearing both sides, we find that the issue relates to demand of CENVAT credit on plastic crates where the appellant has used both in dutiable and in exempted goods. The issue is already settled by virtue of retrospective amendment in the Finance Act, 2010. We also find from the letter dated 13.3.2015 issued by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Puducherry addressed to the appellant that the four show-cause notices which are the subject matter in the impugned order has been considered in his letter where the appellant ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r clearing of exempted goods was calculated with reference to total number of crates used versus crates used for exempted goods and the total credit taken, during the period. This methodology adopted by the Chartered Accountant is found to be reasonable to arrive at the credit attributable to the crates used in exempted goods. The data provided by the Chartered Accountant was verified by the department and no variations were found. I therefore accepted this calculation and accordingly amount required to be paid works out to ₹ 16,58,628/-. Since M/s. PEPSICO India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. have not taken initially an amount of credit of ₹ 20,51,373/- which is more than the attributable credit to be reversed. I hold that there is no furt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
