2016 (8) TMI 286

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Commissioner (Appeals) did not confirm the entire demand of Rs. 23,37,973/- raised on the ground that the respondent was liable to pay 10% of the value of the exempted goods as it had taken cenvat credit on common input services which are used for manufacture of dutiable as well as exempted goods. 2. The ld. Advocate for the respondent pleaded that the appellant took total credit of Rs. 4,17,918/- on common input services which it reversed even prior to the issuance of the Order-in-Original. Therefore, the Revenue s appeal has no substance. He cited the judgment in the case of Jost s Engineering Co. Ltd. vs. CCE, Mumbai-III 2015 (320) ELT 157 (Tri.-Mum.). 3. Regarding the appeal filed by the respondent assessee the ld. Advocate admitt....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....her words, the appellant reversed the entire credit taken along with interest thereon. Therefore, Rule 6(3)(i) will not have any application, when a credit is taken wrongly and the same is reversed along with interest as it tantamounts to non-taking of the credit. The Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in the Hello Minerals. Water (P) Ltd. case cited supra clearly held that reversal of Modvat credit amounts to non-taking of credit on the inputs and even if such reversal was done after the clearance of the goods the said action amounts to non-availment of credit. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Chandrapur Magnet Wires (P) Ltd. (supra) also held that reversal of Modvat Credit at the time of clearance of the goods amounts to non-availing of....