Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Spentex Industries Ltd. Versus CCE & ST, Indore

2016 (9) TMI 282 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Notification 30/2004-CE dated 9.7.2004 - entitlement for exemption benefit - Cenvat Credit - appellant reversed 6% of the value of exempted goods in terms of Rule 6(3)(i) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - Held that:- the appellants claim on the applicability of sub Rule (3D) of Rule 6 is legally sustainable. The said sub-rule provides for a deeming provision to the effect that payment of amount under sub-rule (3) should be considered as credit not taken for the purpose of such exemption notificatio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ew of the specific provision of sub-rule (3D) of Rule 6. - Decided in favour of appellant - Appeal No. E/51901/2014-Ex[DB] - Final Order No. A/50182/2016-EX(DB) - Dated:- 8-2-2016 - Shri S. K. Mohanty Member (Judicial) And B. Ravichandran Member(Technical). Mr. B. L. Narsimhan (Advocate) for the Appellant Mr. S. Nanthuk, DR for the Respondent ORDER: Per B. Ravichandran: This appeal is against the order dated 21.01.2014 of Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore. The brief facts of the case are th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

No. 30/2004-CE dated 9.7.2004 stipulates that nothing contained in the said notification shall apply to the goods in respect of which credit of duty on inputs has been taken under the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Revenue is of the view that as the appellant have availed credit on all inputs (used for duty paid as well as exempted final products) they are barred from availing the above mentioned notification. The appellant s contention is that payment of 6% of value of exempted go .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed notification has been rightly claimed by the appellants. The findings of the Original Authority based on the explanation (3) of Rule (3) is misconceived. The deeming provision under Rule 6(3D) covers the present situation. Even without this sub-rule when the assessee follows the procedure under Rule 6(3)(i) they are entitled for exemption. He relied on the decision of the Tribunal in Life Long Appliances Ltd. 2000 (123) ELT 1110 (Tri. - Del) and in Sita Singh & Sons (P) Ltd. 2015 (327) EL .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version