TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 1184X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he said decision of Tribunal was upheld by Hon ble Supreme Court reported at COMMISSIONER VERSUS AARTI STEELS LTD. [ 2004 (1) TMI 725 - SC ORDER] . The clearances made by appellant under notification 43/2001-CE (N.T.) on the strength of Annexure 45 cannot be held as exempted clearances and therefore, no reversal of Cenvat Credit is necessary - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/12093-12094/2018 - FINAL ORDER NO. A/11291-11292/2021 - Dated:- 25-3-2021 - HON'BLE MEMBER (TECHNIICAL), RAJU Present For the Appellant : None Present For the Respondent : Shri D. Kanjani, Superintendent (AR) ORDER This appeal has been filed by M/s Ram Ratan Wires against order demanding reversal of Cenvat Credit under R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Department by moving a reference application before the Hon ble High Court. But the said application was rejected. Thereafter the Department approached the Hon ble Supreme Court in SLP (CC 8533). But the same had been also rejected. The learned Counsel has placed on record copy of the Apex Court order. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has, therefore, rightly followed the above said earlier order of the Tribunal rendered in the respondent s own case, allowing the Modvat credit to the respondents under similar circumstances. Therefore, I do not find any illegality in the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and the same is upheld. The cross-objections of the respondents accordingly also stand disposed of. The appeal of the R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he same in a specified industrial process. In case, the goods received under this procedure were not used for specified industrial process, the person who receive the goods is liable to pay the duty hence the goods cleared under Chapter X Procedure are neither exempted nor said to be chargeable to Nil duty, thus duty is not payable under Rule 57CC. In this case also, the goods cleared by the appellants against CT-3 bond to the fertilizers manufacturers cannot be term that the sulphuric acid is exempted product or chargeable to nil rate of duty. Hence the provisions of Rule 6 of CCR, 2004 are not applicable to this case. Accordingly, the appellant is not required to reverse 10% of the value of the goods cleared. The impugned order is set asi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
