TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 338X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the appellants are free to choose any of the three options available to them. The appellants have on their own reversed a certain amount of cenvat credit which does not appear to have verified by the lower authorities. In view of the above, appeal is allowed in so far as reversal of credit in terms of 6(3)(ii) is permitted. However for verification of calculation the matter is remanded to the or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e exempted services in terms of 6(3)(i) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The demand for the period 2010-11 was dropped by the lower authorities. However the demand for 2011-15 was confirmed. Meanwhile the appellant had reversed certain amount of credit which they claimed the credit attributable to input services used for trading activity. 2. Ld. Counsel for the appellants argued that in terms of d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant admittedly paid an amount of ₹ 4,06,785/- plus interest, this is not under dispute. Therefore in our view, the appellant have complied with the condition prescribed under Rule 6(3)(ii) read with sub-rule (3A) of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, therefore demand of huge amount of ₹ 24,71,93,529/- of the total value of the vehicle amounting to. ₹ 494,38,70,577/- sold in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l automatically be applied. Therefore we do not understand that when the appellant have categorically by way of their intimation opted for option provided under sub-rule (3)(ii), how Revenue can insist that option (3)(i) under Rule 6 should be followed by the assessee. 5.5 As discussed above and in the facts of the case that actual Cenvat credit attributed to the exempted services used toward ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
