9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 389X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e respondent manufactured the final products in their unit and cleared them for export and also in the domestic tariff area (DTA) in terms of para-6.8 of the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP). The DTA clearances made by them included those made on payment of duty under Notification No. 23/2003-CE, dated 31.03.2003 and also those made without payment of duty in terms of Sl.No. 22 of Notification No. 23/2003-CE dated 31.03.2003 to M/s. Glenmark Generics Ltd. (Colvale) who are holders of Advance authorization issued in terms of para 4.13 read with Notification No. 96/2009-Cus., dated 11.09.2009. The department took the view that in as much as Cenvat credit availed on inputs/input services have been commonly used in the manufacture of Gabapentine, whi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9.2009 are not covered under any of the excluded category provided under Notification No. 52/2003-Cus. dated 31.03.2002 and Notification No. 22/2003-CE dated 31.03.2003. Accordingly, it was alleged that the exemption to the inputs imported/procured indigenously for use in the manufacture of final products is not available. Under these circumstances, SCNs dated 06.12.2013 and dated 04.09.2013 were issued demanding duty of Rs. 5,92,18,825/- and Rs. 2,87,17,616/- respectively along with applicable interest and penalty. After due process of law, the adjudicating authority vide OIO Nos. 16 & 17/2014 dated 10.02.2014, dropped the proceedings initiated in the SCNs. Aggrieved, Revenue has filed appeals No. E/41195/2014 & No. E/41196/2014 before thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. 96/2009-Cus. dated 11.09.2009, hence, it automatically follows as per the ratio enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Polestar & Co, Ltd. - AIR 1978 -SC-897 that the assessee is not entitled for exemption on the inputs imported/indigenously procured under the said notifications. 4. On the other hand, on behalf of the respondent, Ld. Counsel, Shri M. Karthikeyan submitted that in response to a number of representations the CBEC Board had clarified the matter vide Circular No. 1046/34/2016-CX dated 16.09.2016, that second proviso to para-6 of the Notification No. 22/2003-CE dated 31.03.2003 and the proviso to para-3 of the Notification No. 52/2003-Cus., dated 31.03.2003, would not be applicable, in case of supply o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Ld. Counsel is correct in his submissions that the CBEC has set the controversy to rest by their circular dated 16.09.2016, which is a Circular issued to clarify the doubts. The relevant portion is reproduced for ready reference:- "3. The issue has been examined. It is seen that s.no. 22 of notification no. 23/2003-CE dated 31.03.2003 as amended, issued in respect of goods manufactured by EOUs and cleared in DTA, specifically exempts Central Excise duty when such manufactured goods are supplied to an Advance Licence/Authorisation Holder. In fact, clearance from EOU or DTA unit to Advance Licence/Authorisation holder has been allowed without payment of Central Excise duty, as both the cases are of "Import substitution." In case of sup ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
