<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2009 (8) TMI 1045 - COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS), PUNE-II</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153786</link>
    <description>The Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals), Pune-II ruled that electricity, though listed under Chapter Heading 2716 of the Central Excise Tariff Act from 28-2-2005, is not an excisable commodity since no duty rate is specified in the schedule. The absence of a specified duty rate does not equate to a &quot;NIL&quot; rate, making electricity non-excisable rather than exempted. Consequently, the appellant was not liable to pay 10% of electricity&#039;s price under Rule 6(3)(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Commissioner dismissed penalties under Rule 15 and Section 11AC, finding no suppression or mala fide intention where facts were disclosed and no statutory obligation existed to declare common input usage. The decision emphasized that when separate accounts for inputs used in exempted and dutiable products cannot be maintained, reversal of actual credit attributable to exempted products is the proper remedy, not the 10% levy.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2025 15:20:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=170821" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (8) TMI 1045 - COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS), PUNE-II</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153786</link>
      <description>The Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals), Pune-II ruled that electricity, though listed under Chapter Heading 2716 of the Central Excise Tariff Act from 28-2-2005, is not an excisable commodity since no duty rate is specified in the schedule. The absence of a specified duty rate does not equate to a &quot;NIL&quot; rate, making electricity non-excisable rather than exempted. Consequently, the appellant was not liable to pay 10% of electricity&#039;s price under Rule 6(3)(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Commissioner dismissed penalties under Rule 15 and Section 11AC, finding no suppression or mala fide intention where facts were disclosed and no statutory obligation existed to declare common input usage. The decision emphasized that when separate accounts for inputs used in exempted and dutiable products cannot be maintained, reversal of actual credit attributable to exempted products is the proper remedy, not the 10% levy.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153786</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>