TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 626X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Gokldas Intimate Wear [2011 (4) TMI 1123 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] squarely covers the issue and it stands decided in favour of the appellant. Therefore, the appellant will be entitled to utilize the cenvat credit of duty accumulated prior to opting for Notification No. 30/04-CE dated 09.07.2004. - Decided in favour of appellant - 51706/2015 - Final Order No. A/60989/2016-EX[DB] - Dated:- 14-7-2016 - Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) and Mr. V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) Sh. R. Sudhinder, Advocate for the appellant Sh. Satya Pal, AR- for the respondent ORDER The Present appeal is directed engaged the order dated 29.01.2015 passed by the commissioner (Appeals), Chandigarh. The appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed order the appellant has argued that the cenvat credit forward from 2004 has been rightly earned by them and that the amendment introduced by the provision of Rules 11(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 will have only prospective effect and cannot be used to lapse the credits accumulated by them. They further relied upon the decision of the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Commissioner of C. Ex. Bangalore-II Vs. Gokaldas Intimate Wear reported in 2011 (270) ELT 351 (Kar.) in which a similar issue has been decided in their favour. 4. We have heard Sh. R. Sudhinder, Ld. Counsel for the appellant and Sh. Satya Pal Ld. AR appearing for the Revenue. It is necessary to reproduce Rule 11(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 int ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amount from the balance of Cenvat Credit, if any, lying in his credit, the balance, if any, still remaining shall lapse and shall not be allowed to be utilized for payment of duty on excisable goods, whether cleared for home consumption or for export or for payment of service tax on any other output service, whether provided in India or exported. 5. The appellant has opted to avail Notification No. 30/2004-CE dated 09.07.2004 which imposed the condition that no cenvat credit on inputs shall be taken. Revenue has taken view by reference to terms of Rule 11(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, that the appellant is required to pay back the Cenvat Credit attributable to input received and lying in stock or in process or is contained in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roduct which have come into existence on the date of the notification or on the inputs stored in the godown or the work in progress and finished products. Therefore, the judgment in the aforesaid case squarely applies to the case on hand and the Tribunal was justified in granting benefit. 5. It was pointed out to us that in the year 2008 (sic) sub-rule (3) was inserted by a Notification No. 10/2007 with effect from 1-3-2007, which reads as under :- (3) A manufacturer or producer of a final product shall be required to pay an amount equivalent to the CENVAT credit, if any, taken by him in respect of inputs received for use in the manufacture of the said final product and is lying in stock or in process or is contained in the final ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
