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 the assessee was liable to pay 8% of the price of exempted goods under Rule 57CC of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 when the inputs were used to manufacture parts cleared on payment of duty and those parts were then captively used in making exempted or nil-rate final products.
Analysis: The clearance of the parts on payment of duty showed that the Modvat credit availed on the inputs had been used in relation to dutiable intermediate products, not directly in the manufacture of exempted or nil-rate final products. Rule 57C applies only when inputs on which credit is taken are used in the manufacture of final products exempt from duty or chargeable to nil rate of duty. Since the Department did not dispute that duty had been paid on the captively cleared parts and that no credit was taken on such parts when they were used further, the inputs could not be treated as having been used in exempted products. Rule 57CC therefore did not arise.
Conclusion: The assessee was not liable to pay 8% under Rule 57CC, and the Revenue's appeals failed.
Final Conclusion: The demand based on Rule 57CC was unsustainable because the inputs had gone into dutiable intermediate products, and the appeals were rejected.
Ratio Decidendi: Rule 57CC is not attracted where the credit-taken inputs are used to manufacture dutiable intermediate goods that are cleared on payment of duty, even if those intermediates are later captively consumed in exempted or nil-rate final products.