2017 (1) TMI 353

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vocate, for the Respondent. ORDER Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order. 2. The brief facts of the case are that respondent is manufacturing excisable goods and availing Cenvat credit on inputs. The respondent is clearing these goods in domestic market on payment of duty and clearing the same to the SEZ developers without payment of duty. Revenue is in the view that as thes....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 3. Relying on the C.B.E. & C. Circular No. 267/52/2008-CX.8, dated 7-1-2009 submitting that as clearance made to the SEZ units are exempted goods, therefore, they are liable to pay an amount of 10% of the value of goods clear to the SEZ developers. 4. On the other hand, the ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent opposed the contention of the ld. AR and he submits that thi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng the period of 18-9-2008 to 26-12-2008. 7. As per Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, if the respondent manufacturing both dutiable as well as exempted goods, in such situation, the assessee required to maintain separate account of inputs services for dutiable goods as well as final exempted goods. In case an assessee is not maintaining the separate account of inputs, in such a c....