TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>SEZ Supplies Treated as Deemed Exports: Impact on Cenvat Credit Rule</h1> <h3>SUJAKO INTERIORS PVT. LTD. Versus COMMR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, AHMEDABAD</h3> SUJAKO INTERIORS PVT. LTD. Versus COMMR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, AHMEDABAD - 2011 (268) E.L.T. 505 (Tri. - Ahmd.) Issues:1. Applicability of Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 on supplies to Special Economic Zones (SEZ).2. Treatment of supplies to SEZ developers as deemed exports.3. Validity of demand for payment under Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules.Analysis:1. The appellant, engaged in furniture manufacturing availing cenvat credit, cleared finished goods to SEZ developers without duty payment. The Revenue contended that Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules requires payment of 10% of exempted final product value if no separate accounts are maintained. The issue revolved around the applicability of this rule to supplies to SEZ developers.2. The Tribunal referred to precedents like Bhoruka Aluminium Ltd. and CCE Hyderabad v. Vayhan Air Controls P. Ltd., noting the Board's circular treating supplies to SEZ developers as deemed exports. If considered exports, no duty could be demanded. This raised the question of whether the supplies to SEZ developers should indeed be treated as deemed exports, impacting the applicability of Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules.3. A show cause notice demanded payment under Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, which was upheld by the adjudicating authority and Commissioner (Appeals). However, the Tribunal, relying on the Board's circular and precedents, held that the supplies to SEZ developers should be treated as deemed exports. Consequently, the requirement to pay 10% of exempted final product value under Rule 6(3) was deemed inapplicable, leading to the setting aside of the impugned order and granting relief to the appellant.This detailed analysis of the judgment from the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad highlights the key issues surrounding the applicability of Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules to supplies to SEZ developers, the treatment of such supplies as deemed exports, and the ultimate decision in favor of the appellant based on legal interpretations and precedents.
TaxTMI 