9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1133X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7 to August 2008. The appellants were also availing duty exemption from payment of duty on the intermediate products used captively in the production of final products by Notification No.67/95-CE dt. 16.03.95. The said exemption is not available when the final products are exempted, except when such final products are supplied to (a) unit in FTZ (or) (b) 100% EOU (or) (c) a software technology park (or) (d) an Electronic Hardware Technology Park (or) (e) supplies made under Notification No.108/95-CE, dated 28.08.1995, (f) by a manufacturer of dutiable and exempted final products, after discharging the obligation prescribed in Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules. Department however took the view that duty is payable on intermediate products consum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (supra) is reproduced below : "5. We have considered that rival submissions. There is no dispute that common Cenvat Credit availed inputs have been used in the manufacture of goods supplied to DTA buyers on payment on duty and also in respect of the goods supplied to SEZ Developers without payment of duty. The point of dispute is as to whether the goods supplies to SEZ Developers without payment of duty are to be treated as exempted goods within the meaning of this term as defined in Rule 2(d) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and whether in respect of these supplies, the provision of sub-rule (2) and (3) of Rule 6 ibid would be applicable. 6. The term exempted goods as defined in Rule 2(d) in Cenvat Credit Rules means excisable goods w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icable. Same view have been taken by the Tribunal in the case of Sujana Metal Products Ltd. v. CCE, Hyderabad (Supra), wherein the Tribunal held that during the period prior to 31-12-2008, supplies to SEZ Developers made without payment of duty are to be treated as exports and would be covered by sub-rule (6) of Rule 6 and accordingly the provision of sub-rule (1) (2) & (3) of Rule 6 would not be applicable." 5. We find that the above decision was followed by the Tribunal in Ultratech Cements Ltd. (supra) also. Following the ratio of these decisions, we hold that the appellants are very much entitled to the benefit of Notification No.67/95-CE in respect of intermediate goods used to manufacture final products which were supplied to a SEZ u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
