Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
+ Post a Query
Post a New Query
Title :
0/200 char
Description :
Max 0 char
Category :
Delete Reply

Are you sure you want to delete your reply beginning with '' ?

Delete Issue

Are you sure you want to delete your Issue titled: '' ?

Discussion Forum

Back

All Issues

Advanced Search
Reset Filters
Search By:
Search by Text :
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms
Select Date:
FromTo
Category :
OR
Search by Issue ID:
NOTE: If you have inputs in both the fields, then results will be shown for issueId first.
Issue ID :

dutiable and exempted product

vasudevan sudharsanam
a sugar mill has been manufacturing varities of Ethyl Alcohol of dutiable (Rectified Spirit and Natural Spirit-RSNS) and non dutiable (Neutral spirit- DNS) from Molasses. They are not maintaining separate accounts. They have been reversing the credit for RSNS by using the formula Amount expunged = Total Quantity of Molasses consumed / Total Quantity of RSNS produced XQuantity of RSNS produced The assessee find objection from Central Excise Department that the procedure for reversal of the credit is not in conformity with Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The assessee are not providing any exempted service. Now the assessee proposes to follow Rule 6(3)(i)of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The question is whether the assessee can reverse the credit by payment through PLA (now 5% on the value of exempted product) and avail Cenvat Credit. What is the practice followed by other Sugar Mills
Sugar Mill's Credit Reversal Method Challenged: Non-Compliance with Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 A sugar mill produces both dutiable and non-dutiable ethyl alcohol from molasses but does not maintain separate accounts for these. The Central Excise Department objected to their credit reversal method, which is not in line with Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The mill proposes using Rule 6(3)(i) to reverse credit by paying 5% on the value of exempted products. A respondent suggests that, since separate accounts are not maintained, paying 5% of the clearance value of exempted goods is advisable. This cost is not passed to customers and does not appear on excise invoices. (AI Summary)
answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Issues