9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1686X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at Credit Rules, 2004 (for short 'the Credit Rules') read with Section 11A (10) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (For short ' the Excise Act'), along with a penalty under Section 15(1) of The Credit Rules and interest in terms of rule 11 AA of the Excise Act read with Rule 14 of Credit Rules. The demand pertained to the period 17.03.2012 to 7.05.2012. Being aggrieved with the impugned order the appellant is in appeal before this tribunal. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of 'insulated wire and cables' (Electric & Telephone Cables) falling under Chapter Heading No. 8544 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. It was observed by the department that during the relevant period ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this fact. The Notification No. 6/2006-CE (supra) was rescinded on 17/03/2012 and was replaced with a new Notification No. 12/2012 dated 17/03/2012. The new Notification No. 12/2012, also exempted the goods supplied to Mega Power Project as in the past by Notification No. 6/2006. The appellant continued to avail the benefit of the said Notification. 5. During the period 18/03/2012 to 07/05/2012, the Appellant availed the said exemption Notification, but revenue was of the view that the Appellant was required to pay 6% of the value of the said goods in terms of Rule 6(3)(i) of the Credit Rules, as they were availing Cenvat Credit on the common inputs. Though there is an exception carved out in the said-Rule, as contained in Rule 6(6)(vii), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, 2015, which is as under:- 2. The said letter stated that continuance of reference of Notification No. 6/2006-CE dated 01.03.2012 instead of Notification No. 12/2012-CE dated 17.03.2012 int eh Rule 6(6)(vii) for the period 17.03.2012 to 08.05.2012 appeared to be an unintended technical lapse as the Notification No. 6/2006-CE dated 01.03.2006 was superseded by Notification No. 12/2012-CE dated 17.03.2012. The intention of the statue did not appear to be depriving the industry from the benefit availing under Notification No. 12/2012 dated 17.03.2012 during the intervening period i.e. between 17.03.2012 to 08.05.2012. So, the units in the zone were extended to the benefit of Rule 6(6) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 even for the period 17.03. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xemption notification. Exemption continued in as much as with the rescinding of Notification No. 6/2005, the subsequent Notification 12/2012 was immediately introduced. It is only in the provisions of Rule 6(6)(vii) of the Credit Rules, which are to the effect that there would be no requirement of reversal of any amount in case of the goods cleared under the exemption to Mega Power Project, Notification No. 6/2006 was not replaced with Notification No. 12/2012. This inadvertent mistake was clarified by the Board vide the clarification reproduced hereinabove. Admittedly, the goods continued to be cleared under exemption to the Mega Power Projects. Otherwise, also mention of Notification No. 6/2006 in the said Rule does not make any sense in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
