9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1240X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellant Shri K. P. Muralidharan, AC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Brief facts are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of power driven pumps for handling water and electric motors and are clearing the same on payment of duty. They also avail the facility of CENVAT credit on inputs which was utilized for the payment of excise duty on the final products. The appellants cleared the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt debited from the CENVAT credit towards 10% of the value of the credit as directed by the department. After due process of law, refund sanctioning authority rejected the refund claim filed by the appellant. In appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the same. Hence, appellant has filed Appeal No. E/607/2009. 2. Since the appellant had reversed only the amount of Rs. 7,24,026/-, the de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntain separate accounts as required in Rule 6 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, since the appellant is not clearing dutiable and exempted products. The allegation that the waste and scrap cleared by the appellant is an exempted product and therefore appellant has to maintain separate accounts is erroneous. The appellant is eligible for the amount reversed towards payment of 10% of the waste/scrap clea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and scrap. On such score, the appellant is not liable to reverse the credit and is eligible for the refund. The impugned order rejecting the refund is set aside. Consequently, the appellant is not liable to pay interest or penalty imposed. The impugned order demanding interest and penalty is also set aside. Both appeals are allowed with consequential relief if any. (Operative portion of the orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
