TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 968X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le as also exempted goods. As per the appellant such records stand maintained by them and produced before the adjudicating authority. This fact requires verification for which purpose, the impugned order set aside and matter remanded to the original adjudicating authority - appeal allowed by way of remand. - Ex. Appeal Nos.2541-2542/2011, Ex. Appeal Nos.2651-2652/11 with E/Cross Nos.19-20/12 - A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore us that in respect of some of the inputs, as no credit being availed, no separate records were being maintained. 3. Revenue initiated proceedings against the asssessee for confirmation of 5% / 10% of the value of the exempted final products in terms of the provisions of Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules on the ground that they have availed cenvat credit in respect of common inputs used ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity cannot be appreciated inasmuch as the provisions of Rule 6(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules requires an assessee to maintain separate account only in respect of cenvatable inputs and there is no requirement for maintenance of such records in respect of non cenvatable inputs. Further, we also note that there is no requirement of storing both types of inputs separately. Similarly, use of a common f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the adjudicating authority. However, ld. AR for the Revenue has drawn our attention to the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Bharat Heavy Electrical Ltd. Vs. CC CE, Bhopal-2003 (160) ELT 928 (Tri. Del.) holding that no limitation would apply in case of demand of a particular percentage of the value of the final exempted goods in terms of erstwhile provisions of Rule 57CC. 7. Inasmuch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
