TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 1108X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thority of India Ltd., [2013 (5) TMI 460 - CHATTISGARH HIGH COURT] considered an identical issue and held that the amendment to Rule 6 (6) to include SEZ developer with effect from 31/12/2008 has retrospective effect from 2004 onwards and therefore, no reversal of credit in respect of inputs used in the manufacture of goods supplied to the SEZ developer is warranted under law - appeal allowed - de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uty following the procedure prescribed under Rule 19 of the Central Excise Rule 2002, during the period May 2007 to December 2008. The department was of the view that since the goods have been supplied to an SEZ developer without payment of duty, the appellant is not entitled for Cenvat Credit of duty paid on inputs used in the manufacture of goods and supplied to the SEZ developer. Accordingly, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n favour of the appellant by the order of this Tribunal in the case of Sujana Metal Products Ltd., Vs. CCE, Hyderabad reported in 2011 (273) ELT 112. The said decision of the Tribunal was challenged by the department before the Hon ble Andhra Pradesh High Court and the Hon ble High Court vide order dated 02/07/2013 in Central Excise Appeal No.40 of 20012 dismissed the appeal filed by the departmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
