2013 (11) TMI 1125

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 1944. 2. Narrating the facts, in brief, the Ld. Sr. Advocate Dr. Chakraborty has submitted that the applicants are engaged in the manufacture of finished goods viz. Coke. In the manufacture of the said finished goods, various inputs were used on which they avail CENVAT credit. Further, he has submitted that in the process of manufacture of said finished goods, exempted products viz. Coal Tar and coke oven gas also emerge. The Ld. Advocate submitted that since the applicants were not able to maintain separate accounts of the inputs used in or in relation to the manufacture of dutiable products i.e. coke and exempted products viz. Coal Tar and Coke Oven Gas, they have been paying 8%/10% of the price of the exempted goods as per sub-rule (....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Central Excise, Hyderabad-2004 (165) E.L.T. 228 (Tri.-LB). 3. Ld. Special Counsel Shri D.K. Acharyya for the Revenue has submitted that Sub Rule (3) of Rule 6 of CCR, 2004 is specific, in the sense that the applicant is required to follow either of the procedure i.e clause(i) or (ii) as laid down under the said Rule. It is his submission that if a procedure has been followed, the same cannot be abruptly changed, in the same financial year, in view of the Explanation-I to of clause (ii) to sub-rule 3 of said Rule 6 of CCR,2004. In the instant case by choosing to discharge 8%/10% of the price of the exempted products at the beginning of the Financial year, the Applicant had exercised their option under Cl.(i) and hen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ercised any option for availing the benefit under Sub-Rule (i), but paid 8%/10% of the price of the exempted goods due to non-availability of data,they cannot be precluded in exercising their option under Clause (ii) during the same financial year in view of the judgment of the Larger Benchsdecision in the case of Ankit Packaging Ltd. (supra). Undisputedly, the applicant has made a request to the Department seeking permission to exercise their option under Clause (ii) of Sub-Rule (3) of Rule 6 of CCR,2004 on 29th May, 2008. Also, we find that to exercise option under Sub-Rule (ii), mere exercise of such option is not enough but the conditions/ procedure laid down under Sub-rule 3 (A) of said Rule 6 is required to be followed by furnishing ....