Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (11) TMI 1216 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

2016 (11) TMI 1216 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD - TMI - Refund claim - Reversal of CENAVT credit - medicines destroyed being unfit for human consumption during the period November 2011 to May 2012 - Held that: - I find that the provisions of Rule 21 of the Central Excise Rules 2002 is attracted in the present case as the Appellant by their own admission has destroyed the waste pharmaceutical, same being expired medicine unfit for consumption of human being and therefore, the Appellant were required to hav .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

reversed if the payment of duty is ordered to be remitted under Rule 21 of Central Excise Rules 2002. I also find that the Board, vide circular No.800/33/2004-CX, dt.01.01.2004 has clarified that the credit of Excise duty paid on the inputs used in the manufacture of finished goods, on which duty has been remitted due to damage or destruction etc., is not permissible and dues with interest should be recovered. I find that reversal of CENVAT Credit on inputs contained in the waste pharmaceuticals .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

or Appellant: None For Respondent: Shri A. Mishra, A.R. ORDER None present for the Appellants despite notice, nor any adjournment request either on the earlier date of hearing or for today filed by the Appellant. Heard the learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue. 2. This appeal is filed against OIA No.21/2013(Ahd-II)CE/AK/Commr(A)/Ahd, dt.31.01.2013, passed by Commissioner (Appeals), C.Ex. & S.Tax, Ahmedabad 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Appellant had reverse .....

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 Commissioner (Appeals), who in turn, rejected their appeal. Hence, the present appeal. 4. The learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue submits that even though the finished products were destroyed by the Appellant, being unfit for human consumption, however, they did not apply for remission of duty. The contention of the Appellant that they have not applied for remission of duty, hence, sub-rule (5C) of Rule 3 of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 is not applicable, cannot be acceptable. 5. I .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s therefore, they can remove the same without getting remission permission and the question of reversal of CENVAT Credit does not arise and hence Notification No.33/2007-CE(NT), dt.07.09.2007 is not applicable to their case. I find that the provisions of Rule 21 of the Central Excise Rules 2002 is attracted in the present case as the Appellant by their own admission has destroyed the waste pharmaceutical, same being expired medicine unfit for consumption of human being and therefore, the Appella .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

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

Go to Mobile Version