9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 203X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cise duty and also cleared under bond. The departments case is that since the appellants have not carried out any manufacturing activity and the files received from other unit is the finished goods and not inputs, therefore the credit is not admissible. Accordingly, cenvat credit availed on such goods was disallowed. The Commissioner (Appeals) in the appeal filed by the appellants upheld the order of the adjudicating authority. 2. Shri Vinod Atwani, ld. CA appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that they have received the duty paid files from the other unit. They have taken credit in terms of Rule 16 and while exporting the said duty paid goods on which the credit was taken they have discharged the excise duty. The departments conte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re they are not entitled for the cenvat credit in terms of Rule 16 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. 4. I have carefully considered the submission made by both sides. I find that the case of the appellants is that whether they are entitled for the cenvat credit on the duty paid goods received and resold for the purpose of export in terms of Rule 16 which reads as under:- "Rule 16. Credit of duty on goods brought to the factory. - (1) Where any goods on which duty had been paid at the time of removal thereof are brought to any factory for being re-made, refined, re-conditioned or for any other reason, the assessee shall state the particulars of such receipt in his records and shall be entitled to take CENVAT credit of the duty paid as if su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s to manufacture and other, activity which does not amount to manufacture. The appellantscase falls in the second category. Therefore, whether any activity is carried out or otherwise if the activity does not amount to manufacture, the credit is admissible in terms of Rule 16 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. Accordingly, even though the appellants have not carried out any activity but the goods were cleared as such they are entitled for the cenvat credit in terms of Rule 16. As regards the contention in the show-cause notice and submission of the ld. AR that they encashed the cenvat credit by utilising the excess credit. I am of the view that if that is the case, the department should have taken action for denial of the rebate claim. As far as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
