TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 113X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in applying the overriding effect of Section 51 of the SEZ Act, 2005 to hold the impugned goods as ''exports'' and at the same time ignoring the provisions of (c) of sub section (1) of Section 26 of SEZ Act, according to which the supplies by domestic units to the units in SEZs/ Developers of SEZ are exempted from payment of Central Excise Duties and Whether the Hon'ble CESTAT was correct in hol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the Revenue - CEA No. 109 of 2014 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 9-8-2016 - MR. RAJESH BINDAL AND MR. HARINDER SINGH SIDHU JJ. Mr. Anshuman Chopra, Advocate for the Appellant. Mr. Jagmohan Bansal, Advocate for the Respondent. ORDER RAJESH BINDAL J The revenue is in appeal against the order dated 26.2.2013 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Hon'ble CESTAT was correct in holding that the amendment to Rule 6(6)(i) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 vide Notification No.50/2008 CE (N.T) dated: 31.12.2008 shall be applicable with retrospective effect, when the Ministry/Board vide its Circular No. 267/52/2008-CX dated: 07.01.2009 has clarified that the amendment is prospective in nature and would apply to supplies cleared from the date o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... present appeal has already been gone into by three different High Courts and the opinion expressed is against the revenue, for the reasons assigned in those judgments, we deem it appropriate to follow the same to maintain consistency as the Central Excise Act is a Central Statute. Accordingly no substantial question of law arises. 4. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. - - TaxTMI - TMITax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
