TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 138X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uation, the impugned order is not sustainable in law and is set aside. Further when the credit itself is not liable to be reversed, the question of payment of interest does not arise at all. - Decided in favour of appellant - E/2551/2012-SM - Final Order No. 20507/ 2016 - Dated:- 1-7-2016 - Shri S. S Garg, Judicial Member Mr. Rama Subramanian, Adv For the Appellant Mr N. Jagadish, A.R. For the Respondent ORDER Per S. S. Garg The present appeal is directed against the order-in-appeal passed by Commissioner (Appeals) dated 27.07.2012 vide which the Commissioner has rejected the appeal of the appellant and upheld the order of the Additional Commissioner. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bility to reverse the credit on inputs arises only if the inputs are fully written off or where any provision to write off fully has been made in the books of accounts, whereas they have made provision for partial write off only. The learned counsel further submitted that the Notification No. 3/2011(CE-NT) dated 01.03.2011 vide which the provisions of the Rule has been extended even to the goods written off partially is effective only from 01.03.2011 and the instant case pertains to the period prior to 01.03.2011. As such he submitted that there is no need to reverse CENVAT credit and consequently the question of payment of interest does not arise. 4. For better appreciation it is relevant to reproduce Rule 3(5B) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ten off the books of account. Only cases of writing off the full value of the inputs on which Cenvat credit had been availed called for reversal of the credit. The present one is not such a case. It is also pertinent to note that the Department has no case that the amendment dated 1-3-2011 has retrospective effect. 5. On the other hand the learned A.R. reiterated the findings of the Commissioner. 6. After considering the submission of both sides and on perusal of the provisions of Rule 3(5B) cited (supra) and the judgment of this Tribunal in Sanghavi Engineering (supra), I am of the considered view that the appellant is not liable to reverse CENVAT credit when the value of inputs has been written off partially and the provision of R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
