TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 392X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or others the SSI unit is entitled to avail benefit of SSI exemption on the goods manufactured on own account. Once the assessee is maintaining separate records and is not availing availing credit on inputs used for the production of goods, which are cleared under N/N. 8/2003-CE dt. 1.3.2003, they are eligible to claim exemption under the said notification. The Appellant is eligible for the benefit of SSI exemption and the demands are not sustainable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/224/08 - A/85174/2018 - Dated:- 30-1-2018 - Shri Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial) And Shri Raju, Member (Technical) Shri Neerav Mainkar, Advocate - for Appellant Shri A.B. Kulgod, Asstt. Commr. (A.R) - for Respondent O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... By placing reliance upon the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Ramesh Food Products - 2004 (174) ELT 310 (SC) he viewed that in said case the manufacturer had the choice of choosing one of the two concessions, i.e. either Modvat Scheme or Notification No.175/86. That since there is no one-to-one co-relation between the inputs and final products under Modvat scheme, hence it is not possible to allow the manufacturer to simultaneously avail modvat on some products and avail exemption on some other products under small scale exemption scheme. He therefore held that the Appellant is not entitled for the exemption on his own brand goods and is liable to pay duty. Hence the present appeal by the Appellant. 2. Shri Neerav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of Nebulae Health Care Ltd - 2015 (325) ELT 431 (SC) to support his contention. 3. Shri A.B. Kulgod, Ltd. A.C. (A.R.) appearing for the revenue supports the findings of the impugned order. 4. We have perused the records and gone through the submissions made by both the sides. We find that the Appellant during the relevant period were manufacturing the goods under their own brand name as well as brand name owned by other. They were maintaining separate records for inputs consumed in the manufacture of above products and were availing credit on only those inputs which were used for the manufacture of goods bearing brand name of others and on which duty was paid by them. This fact has nowhere been disputed in the Show Cause Noti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
