Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, after reversal of the proportionate credit attributable to inputs used in exempted goods, the assessee was still liable to pay 8% of the value of the exempted clearances under the relevant CENVAT scheme provisions, and whether the retrospective amendment to those provisions removed such liability.
Analysis: The assessee had reversed the credit relatable to inputs used in the manufacture of the exempted intermediate product and thereafter maintained separate accounts for inputs used in the exempted final product. The Tribunal relied on the view that where common inputs are used for dutiable and exempted products and the proportionate credit attributable to exempted goods is reversed, demand of 8% of the value of exempted clearances is not sustainable. It further noted that the retrospective amendment to the relevant rules confirmed that once the CENVAT credit taken is reversed, the liability to pay 8% of the price of exempted goods does not survive.
Conclusion: The demand of 8% of the value of exempted clearances was not payable after reversal of the proportionate credit, and the Revenue's appeal failed.
Ratio Decidendi: Reversal of proportionate CENVAT credit attributable to exempted goods, especially in light of a retrospective validating amendment, extinguishes any further obligation to pay the prescribed percentage of the value of exempted clearances.