TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (3) TMI 439
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e registered with the Central Excise. They have been availing CENVAT credit of duty paid on inputs, capital goods, service tax paid on input services and have been utilizing the same for their duty liability on the goods manufactured and cleared by them. Appeal No. E/42061/2014 3. The appellant company had imported 34,814 kgs. of Steel Tyre Cord vide Bill of Entry No. 945622 dated 03.02.2009 from Malaysia and availed CENVAT credit of CVD to the tune of Rs. 7,73,306/-. In the process of production it was found that the imported material had a defect and the appellant decided not to use the said steel tyre cord as inputs any further. By this time, 9336 kgs. of imported steel tyre cord was already consumed in the production process and th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to re-export the capital goods as they were ready to replace the x-ray tube free of charge. The capital goods were returned by re-exporting the same under form ARE-1 No. 0006/11-12 dated 08.02.2012. The appellant assessee informed the department that the malfunctioning of x-ray tubes imported from France was being re-exported to the supplier and credit was not reversed while re-exporting the same as per Rule 19 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. Show cause notice was issued alleging that the appellant assessee had contravened the provisions under Rule 3 (5) read with Rule 14 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, and demanded an amount of Rs. 2,50,750/- and proposed to levy interest and penalty. The adjudicating authority ordered the reversal of Rs.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e 5 does not apply to inputs exported as such; that reliance placed on the Tribunals rulings in the case of Zydex Industries Vs CCE reported in 2007 (219) ELT 602 (Tri-Ahmd); RFH Metal Castings P Ltd vs CCE, Jaipur reported in 2005 (184) ELT 194 (Tri-Del) and the clarification issued by the Board is inapplicable as the applicability of the said circulars in the context of the present legal position was not discussed in the said order; that in respect of one appeal, i.e Appeal No. E/42061/2014, the plea of limitation was also not accepted for the reason that there is nothing on record to show that the relevant facts were brought to the knowledge of the department, either during audit or otherwise, though they had intimated the re-export, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he benefit of drawback for re-export is available under Section 74. The Tribunal had relied upon the circulars dated 31.12.1996 and 29.8.2000 which are akin to the facts of the instant case. The Commissioner (Appeals) placed reliance on the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court in the case of M/s KCP Limited Vs CCE, Chennai - 2013 (295) ELT 353 (SC). 9. On a careful reading of the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court, the facts were on an entirely different footing and in that case the assessee who is a manufacturer of sugar and cement machinery and parts thereof, the objection of the department for denial of credit was on account of non-user of the inputs which were manufactured by other Manufacturers in their respective factory. In the ....