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>Manufacturers of nil duty goods can claim CENVAT credit on inputs if exported under Rule 6(5) and 6(6)</h1> <h3>M/s Shree Baba Exports Versus Commissioner, Customs & Central Excise, Hapur</h3> M/s Shree Baba Exports Versus Commissioner, Customs & Central Excise, Hapur - TMI Issues:The judgment involves issues related to demand for reversal of Cenvat credit on Menthol Crystals exempted under a notification, applicability of Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, and whether the benefit of Rule 6(6) can be extended on export goods.Summary:The Appellant, a manufacturer of Menthol/Menthol Crystals & DMO, faced a demand for reversal of Cenvat credit on Menthol Crystals exempted under a notification, while DMO remained chargeable to duty. The original authority confirmed the demand, which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the first round of litigation. However, the Tribunal in an earlier order held that Rule 11(3) was not applicable in this case. Regarding Rule 6, the Tribunal stated that if fully exempted excisable goods are exported under bond, Cenvat credit would not be liable to be reversed. The matter was remanded for ascertainment of exports.In the subsequent round of adjudication, the Additional Commissioner contended that since the goods claimed as exported were not against LUT or bond, the benefit of Rule 6(6) could not be extended on export goods. The demand was confirmed again, but the penalty was set aside. The Appellant then filed a fresh defense stating that a portion of the disputed quantity was cleared for home consumption, while the rest was exported. The Additional Commissioner again confirmed the demand and imposed a penalty, which was set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals).The Appellant argued that the exported goods were cleared under ARE-1, indicating they were exported under Bond/LUT. Cenvat credit was not required to be reversed for exempted finished goods exported under bond/LUTs, as per settled law. The Appellant cited several judgments in support of this argument.After considering the arguments and perusing the records, the Tribunal found that the issue was covered by a judgment of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, which held that an assessee manufacturing goods chargeable to nil duty could avail Cenvat credit on inputs used in the manufacture of such goods if they were exported. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal filed by the Appellant with consequential relief as per law.
TaxTMI 