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 Rule 6(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, and Explanation 1 thereto applied to bags and barrels sold by the manufacturer after use in production, and whether an amount equal to 6% of their value was payable.
Analysis: Rule 6(1) applies where an assessee manufactures both dutiable and exempted goods and seeks Cenvat credit in relation to exempted goods. The bags and barrels in question were not manufactured goods of the appellant but were merely containers used for raw material and sold after use. The reasoning applied was that waste of raw material not arising from the manufacturing process cannot be treated as resulting from manufacture, and the same principle governed the present facts. Since the goods did not arise out of the appellant's manufacturing activity, the rule and its explanation had no application.
Conclusion: Rule 6(1) and Explanation 1 thereto were not applicable, and the demand could not be sustained.
Final Conclusion: The demand and penalty were set aside and the appeal succeeded.
Ratio Decidendi: Cenvat credit reversal under Rule 6(1) is attracted only in relation to exempted goods manufactured by the assessee, and waste or scrap not arising from the manufacturing process does not fall within its ambit.