9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 756X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsideration in these cases are, whether the respondent is eligible to avail for CEVNAT credit the various inputs which were utilized for manufacturing final products and cleared to 100% EOU. The respondent herein claimed on refund of an amount availed on CENVAT credit on inputs stating that these inputs were consumed for manufacturing of goods which were sold to 100% EOU and the CENVAT credit cannot be utilized as there are no home clearances. The adjudicating authority rejected the refund claims on the ground that clearances which are effected to 100% EOUs, cannot be equated to physical exports and hence Provisions of Rule 5 do not get attracted. The First Appellate Authority after considering the submissions made before him by the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de deemed exports made during the period up to February 2015 from the benefit and the respondent has to be held to be eligible for the refund of accumulated CENVAT credit in terms of Rule 5 of the CCR, 2004 as it stood at the material time. I also find that GOI in the case of Bhuwalika Steel Industries reported in [2014 (311) ELT 971 GOI] had held that clearances made to 100% EOU were to be treated physical exporters. Though, the said decision is in the context of Rule 18 of the CER, 2002 the definition given to exports is relevant to the Rule 5 of the CCR as well. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, in the latest case of Commissioner Vs. Metflow Cast (P) Ltd., reported in [2016 (331) ELT 355 (Guj)] has held that goods cleared to 100% EOU can b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts themselves on the same question of law has allowed the appeals. Respectfully following the said decision I hold that the appellants are entitled to the refund of the accumulated CENVAT credit under Rule 5 of the CCR, 2004 on the subject clearances made to 100% EOU during the period from April, 2013 to December, 2013. 4. Ld. Counsel submits that in an identical set of facts in respect of very same assessee, this Bench Appeal No.E/30131-30136/2016 vide Final Order No.A/30005-30010/2017 dated 03.01.2017 allowed the appeals of the appellant on the same issue and produced the copy of said order. On perusal of the same, I find that the issue in these appeals and in those appeals are in respect of the same assessee. In view of the fact that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
