9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 691X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... murthy. N.K, AR - For the Respondent ORDER Per: SS GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 26.10.2009 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise whereby the Commissioner has confirmed the demand of Rs. 6,61,771/- being an amount equal to 10% of the value/price cleared to Special Economic Zone (SEZ) developer during the period between 4.9.2008 to 31.12.2008 under R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods without payment of duty from their factory premises by raising invoices as required under Rule 11 of CER, 2002 in their own name. Further, clearances made to the developer in the SEZ are not notified in Rule 6(6) of CCR, 2004 which exempts excisable goods cleared instances, Such as, if the assessee in such case clearing goods to the developer, should not avail CENVAT credit as per Rule 6(1) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2004 by substituting clause (i) of sub rule (6) of Rule 6 of CCR, 2004 by way of Notification No.58/2008-CE dated 31.12.2008 is retrospective in nature as held by the High Court of Karnataka in the case of CCE Vs. Fosroc Chemicals (India) Pvt. Ltd.: 2015 (318) ELT 240 (Kar.) and also the High Court of Chattisgarh in the case of UOI Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd.: 2013 (297) ELT 166 (Chattisgar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nclusion that supplies made to SEZ from DTA (Domestic Tariff Area) are deemed exports and the assessee is entitled to the benefit of CENVAT credit and is not required to maintain separate account for dutiable and non-dutiable goods. By respectfully following the ratio of the above said decision, I am of the view that the impugned order is not sustainable in law and therefore, I set aside the impug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
