Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Rasi Technitex (P) Ltd. Versus CCE, Salem

2018 (2) TMI 807 - CESTAT CHENNAI

CENVAT credit - N/N. 29/2004-CE dated 09/07/2004 and N/N. 30/2004-CE dated 09/07/2004 - allegation raised in the SCN is that the appellants are not eligible for the credit available on the components, spares and accessories of capital goods, for the reason that the final products cleared by them are exempted from payment of duty - Held that: - identical issue decided in the case of The Commissioner of Central Excise Versus M/s. Same Duetz Fahr India (P) Ltd., Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appell .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

, Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) Shri R. Balagopal, Consultnat for the appellant Shri K.P. Muralidharan, AC (AR) for the respondent ORDER Per Bench The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of 100% cotton yarn. They were availing exemption from payment of duty simultaneously under Notification No. 29/2004-CE dated 09/07/2004 and Notification No. 30/2004-CE dated 09/07/2004, as per the clarification issued by CBEC vide letter F. No. 795/28/2004-CX dated 28 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

with Rule 2 (d) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, SCN was issued raising allegation of irregular credit availed on capital goods and proposing to recover the same along with interest and for imposing penalties. After due process of law, the adjudicating authority confirmed the demand, interest and also imposed penalties. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the same. Hence this appeal. 2. On behalf of the appellants, Ld. Consultant Shri R. Balagopal submitted that the department has denied .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

re of exempted goods is incorrect. Further, the finished goods were exported/cleared under bond. Therefore, sub-rule 6 of Rule 6 would apply, which states that sub-rules 1,2,3 & 4 shall not be applicable in case the excisable goods are removed without payment of duty when cleared for export under bond, in terms of CER, 2002. He relied upon the Hon ble High Court of Madras judgment in the case of CCE, Chennai Vs. Same Duetz Fahr India (P) Ltd. 2017 (6) GSTL 453 (Mad.). 3. Ld. AR, Shri K.P. Mu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(4) shall not be applicable in case the excisable goods removed without payment of duty are either (i) cleared to a unit in a special economic zone or (ii) cleared to a 100 % export-oriented undertaking; or (iii cleared to a unit in an Electronic Hardware Technology Park or Software Technology Park; or (iv) supplied to the United Nations or an international organization for their official use or supplied to projects funded by them, on which exemption of duty is available under notifidation of th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ment is reproduced as under:- 11.1 For the sake of convenience, the relevant extracts of Rule 6 are set forthwith hereafter: Rule 6. Obligation of manufacturer of dutiable and exempted goods and provider of taxable and exempted services. - (1) The CENVAT credit shall not be allowed on such quantity of input or input service which is used in the manufacture of exempted goods or for provision of exempted services, except in the circumstances mentioned in sub-rule (2) : Provided that the CENVAT cre .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f a special economic zone for their authorized operations; or (ii)..... (iii).... (iv).... (v) cleared for export under bond in terms of the provisions of the Central Excise Rules, 2002; or (vi)..... 12. A plain reading of sub-rule (1) of Rule 6, would show that Cenvat Credit is not allowed, inter alia, qua such input service, which is used in the manufacture of exempted goods, except in circumstances mentioned in sub-rule (2). Sub-rule (2) is not relevant for the purposes of this case. 12.1 In .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

re cleared for export, albeit under bond. 12.3 Therefore, the question, which arises is, would sub-rule (6) of Rule 6 of the 2004 Rules, would trump in the instant case, the provisions of sub-rule (1) of Rule 6. 13. It is no one s case that the goods manufactured by the assessee were not excisable. Though the goods were excisable, the only reason, that Central Excise duty was not paid or was not payable, was, on account of the provisions of the 2006 notification. Therefore, upon executing the bo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version