9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 992X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ri N.K.Garg, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri G.M.Sharma, AR ORDER Per : Ashok Jindal The appellants are in appeal against the impugned order wherein an amount of 10% equal to the value of exempted goods cleared by the appellants have been demanded from them. 2. As the issue is common in both the appeals, therefore, both the appeals are taken up together and decided by a common order. 3. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ash at the time of captively consuming to manufacture the zinc sulphate. After investigation, it was concluded that the way of taking Cenvat credit or reversal of Cenvat credit by the appellants is not correct attributable to inputs used in the manufacture of exempted final products. Therefore, in terms of Rule 6 (3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, the appellants are required to pay an amount of 10 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vat credit or reversing the same or by paying duty after adding 10% on the value of lime ash which is used in manufacture of the exempted goods. It is his contention that the credit is to be quantified on the basis of the quantity and not on the value of the goods. It is also submitted that Therefore, the calculation made by them is correct. It is a fact that they are maintaining separate records, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... careful consideration of the submissions made by both sides, we find short issue involved in this case is whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the provisions of Rule 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 are invokable or not. 8. We find that it is recorded in the show cause notice itself that they have availed proportionate Cenvat credit calculated in the manner which appear is not leg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
