TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 190X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... foresaid excise notifications but it was paid by availing Customs Notification No. 12/2012-Cus, therefore, the restriction provided in Rule 3 (i) and proviso thereof shall not be applicable to the facts of the present case. Identical issue decided in the case of M/S. ASAHI SONGWON COLORS LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE ST., VADODARA [ 2018 (9) TMI 159 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD] where it was held that Even if the importer wants to avail the exemption of N/N. 12/2012-CE for payment of CVD, the same will not be available to the importer and Credit is allowed. The impugned order is not sustainable - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Excise Appeal No.10955 of 2019 - A/10214/2022 - Dated:- 1-3-2022 - MR. RAME ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fully considered the submissions made by both the sides and perused the records. The facts is not under disputes that the appellant have paid the CVD on imported coal in terms of exemption Notification No. 12/12-Cus. The restriction for availing of credit on Excise duty paid is given in Rule 3 (i) which is reproduced below:- Rule 3 (i) of CCR, 2004:- (1) A Manufacturer or producer of final products or a provider of output service shall be allowed to take credit (hereinafter referred to as the CENVAT credit) of- (i) The duty of excise specified in the First Schedule to the Excise Tariff Act, leviable under the Excise Act, (a) In respect of which the benefit of an exemption under notification No. 01/2011-CE dated the 1st M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l imported by the appellant, CVD of 2% paid by availing the benefit of Customs Notification No. 12/2012-Cus dated 17.03.2012, which is clear from the bill of entry. The appellant have not availed Central Excise Notification No. 12/2012-CE, therefore, the restriction provided in Rule 3 of Cenvat Credit Rules, is not applicable in the present case as it relates to excise Notification No. 12/2012-CE. Therefore, on the CVD paid under Notification No. 12/2012-Cus, credit is admissible. 3. Ms. Nitina Nagori, ld. Dy. Commissioner (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the finding of the impugned order. 4. On careful consideration of the submissions made by both the sides, I find that the restriction provided in Rule 3 of Cenv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of Notification No. 12/2012-CE for payment of CVD, the same will not be available to the importer. Therefore, in any case, in the case of import the Notification No. 12/2012-CE is not relevant. 5. In view of the above discussions, the impugned order is set-aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief in accordance with the law. 5.3 As regard, judgment of Lonsenkiri Chemicals Industries (Supra) cited by the Learned Authorized Representative, I find that in that case though the credit was of CVD paid on imported coal but by availing Central Excise Notification No. 01/2011-CE and/or 12/2012-CE whereas in the present case the CVD was admittedly paid by availing Customs exemption Notification No. 12/2012-Cus on which th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
