TMI Blog2007 (4) TMI 716X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE [ 1995 (12) TMI 72 - SUPREME COURT] to hold that even when common inputs are used for exempted and dutiable goods and if the appellant is not in a position to maintain separate accounts if he reverses the credit attributable to the inputs contained in exempted products, then there is no requirement of payment of 8/ 10% on the value of the exempted goods. Thus, we allow the appeal of the appellant with consequential relief. - S. L. Peeran (Judicial Member ) And T. K. Jayaraman (Technical Member) For the Appellant : J. J. Bhat (Sr. Adv.), Rajesh Chander Kumar (Adv.), A. Dave (Adv.) For the Respondent : K. Sambi Reddy (JDR) ORDER T. K. Jayaraman (Technical Member) This appeal has been filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f credit availed is sufficient compliance for availing exemption under a Notification, when there is a condition that the exemption is available only when there is no availing of modvat credit. (i) Chandrapur Magnet Wires (P) Ltd. vs. CCE, Nagpur - 1996 (81) ELT 3 (SC). (ii) Tube Investments of India Ltd. vs. CCE, Madurai - 2004 (177) ELT 880 (Tri.-Chennai.) (iii) CCE, Visakhapatnam vs. Deccan Sugars - 2006 (199) ELT 529 (Tri.-Bang.) (iv) Hetro Drugs Ltd. vs. CCE, Hyderabad - 2005-(XC2)-GJX-3058-CESTAT (v) Forbes Gokak Mills Limited vs. CCE, Belgaum - 2007 (208) ELT 521 (Tri.-Bang.) (vi) ICOMM Tele Limited vs. CCE, Visakhapatnam-II - 2007 (208) ELT 523 (Tri.-Bang.) (vii) Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd. vs. CCE, Hyderabad - 2005 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssibility of an exemption Notification 69/86, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Chandrapur Magnet Wires Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE, Nagpur - 1996 (81) ELT 3 (SC) has held that reversal of modvat credit amounts to non-availment of credit, therefore, when the appellants reverse the credit they would be benefit of exemption Notification cannot be denied. In the said Notification, the exemption is available to the goods on condition that no input credit is taken. The appellants used the same inputs for dutiable and exempted products. Since the exemption Notification is subject to the condition of non-availment of modvat credit on inputs, they subsequently reversed the credit attributable to the exempted product. However, Revenue held that once t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
