Cenvat credit on export goods: mistaken exemption reference did not defeat prima facie stay relief

Goods manufactured by a 100% EOU and exported under bond were treated as eligible for Cenvat credit relief under Rule 6(6) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, because the reference to Notification No. 30/2004-C.E. was inadvertent. The Tribunal noted that credit could not be denied merely on account of a mistaken mention of an exemption notification where the goods were in fact cleared only for export. On those admitted facts, the appellant established a prima facie case for stay and waiver of the duty, interest and penalty demand.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to stay and waiver of the duty, interest and penalty demand in view of Rule 6(6) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, where the goods were manufactured by a 100% EOU and were cleared only for export but exemption under Notification No. 30/2004-C.E. was mentioned by mistake.

Analysis: The goods were undisputedly manufactured by a 100% EOU and were actually exported under bond. The reference to Notification No. 30/2004-C.E. was stated to be inadvertent. On these admitted facts, Rule 6(6) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was found to support the appellant's contention that credit could not be denied merely because the exemption notification had been mentioned by mistake. The Tribunal also relied on the principle that a mistake in claiming or applying a benefit should not, by itself, result in denial of a benefit otherwise available in law.

Conclusion: The appellant established a prima facie case for stay and waiver of the amount demanded.

---