TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 761X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t reversed would be the actual proportionate credit or not. For this limited purpose the matter requires to be remanded to the adjudicating authority. Penalty - Held that: - issue is an interpretational one and had travelled up to the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Further the period involves pre as well as post amendment - penalty imposed is unwarranted and requires to be set aside. Appeal allowed by way of remand. - Appeal No. E/138/2011 - Final Order No. 43373/2017 - Dated:- 22-12-2017 - Ms. SulekhaBeevi C.S. Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) Shri M. Karthikeyan, Advocate For the Appellant Shri P. Hemavathy Commr. (AR) For the Respondent ORDER Per Bench The appellants are manufactu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. On behalf of appellant, the Ld. Counsel submitted that during the relevant period there was much confusion as to the interpretation of Rule 6(2). The Rule was very clear in Cenvat Credit Rule, 2002 wherein there was no need to maintain separate records in respect of inputs used as fuel. Sub rule (2) of Rule 6 was amended with effect from 16.05.2005 vide notification No. 27/2005- NT whereby the words except inputs intended to be used as fuel was deleted. The issue travelled up to the Supreme Court, and vide decision reported in the case of CCE vs Gujarat Narmada Fertilizers Co. Ltd (GNFC) 2009 (240) ELT 661 (S.C) the Hon ble Apex Court held that credit is not admissible on fuel input used for exempted product. He submitted that however, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Finance Act, 2010 brought forth retrospective amendment to these provisions dealing with the subject of maintaining separate account for common inputs. The assessees were given an option to calculate and reverse the proportionate credit attributable to exempted product within a period of 6 months from the date of Presidential Assent of Finance Bill 2010, i.e; on or before 07.11.2010. The assessee exercised the option in respect of input services pending in three other SCNs. But did not exercise any option in respect of this case / Furnace Oil. The one time concession given by government is lost to the assessee who has to pay 8%/10% of the value of clearances. The assessee cannot take the shelter of the retrospective amendment after 7.11 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oods, of the exempted final product charged by the manufacturer for the sale of such goods at the time of their clearance from the factory. Explanation I.-.............. Explanation II.-............. 6. The appellant was restricting the credit availment to 85% on inputs other than Furnace Oil. They availed 100% credit of duty paid on Furnace Oil. The Hon ble Apex Court has held that credit is not admissible on fuel input used for manufacture of exempted product. The appellants contend that they have reversed proportionate credit and therefore may not be compelled to pay the 8%/10% of value of clearances. This is opposed by department stating that the government had given a concession to exercise option within a time frame. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
