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 denial of exemption could sustain a demand for reversal of Cenvat credit when the condition attached to the exemption notification was not fulfilled, and whether export of goods under bond rendered the credit availment merely procedural.
Analysis: The exemption under the notification was conditional, and the relevant condition required that the goods be manufactured from specified fabrics on which no Cenvat credit had been taken. The proper consequence of breach of such a condition was denial of the exemption, not a demand for reversal of the credit already taken. The reasoning adopted by the lower authorities was therefore not accepted. The export-clearance argument also supported the assessee because, when goods are exported under bond, the duty element on inputs could be refunded, making the exercise revenue neutral. The additional plea regarding the manufacturing process did not alter the result.
Conclusion: The demand for reversal of Cenvat credit was not sustainable, and the assessee succeeded.
Final Conclusion: The appeal was allowed with consequential relief, and the assessee obtained relief against the credit demand.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the statutory condition for exemption is non-availment of credit, breach of that condition ordinarily results in denial of exemption rather than a demand to reverse credit already taken, especially when the overall transaction is revenue neutral.