9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 209X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dt. (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER Per: B. Ravichandran Both Revenue as well as the assessees are in appeal against the order dated 07.12.2009 of Commissioner (Appeals) of LTU, Chennai. Appellant-assessee are engaged in the manufacture of various types of electrical relays which are liable to Central Excise duty. These relays are also used in further manufacture of control panels which were cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that they have complied with the provisions of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, has not been accepted by the Revenue. The lower authorities held that since the appellant-assessee did not discharge 10% amount on the value of the exempted clearances (control panels), they have to pay Central Excise duty on the relays captively consumed. 2. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant-assessee submitted t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ischarging duty in terms of Rule 6. Since the appellant-assessee did not pay any duty, the lower authorities are correct on merits. 4. We have heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 5.1 The facts of the case are not in dispute. The appellant-assessee cleared the control panels availing exemption to Mega Power Projects. For such exemption, the appellant-assessees have complied with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... self-contradictory. 5.2 On careful consideration of the facts of the case and submissions of the appellants, we note that the eligibility of the appellant-assessee for exemption under Notification No.67/1995 cannot be disputed. They have followed the provisions and complied with the provisions of Rule 6 and all the connected requirements of the Notification No. 67/1995. We find that the ratio and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
