2017 (3) TMI 7

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... organic chemicals and pharmaceutical products falling under Chapter Heading 29 and 30 of Central Excise Tariff Act (CETA), 1985 and they are availing CENVAT credit under CENVAT Credit Rules (CCR), 2004. During the course of verification of appellants CENVAT account for the period from September 2010 to March 2011, it was observed that they had availed CENVAT credit on duty paid invoices raised by 100% EOU. It appeared on verification of the said invoices that 100% EOU had charged Education Cess and Secondary Higher Education (SHE) Cess on customs duty and Education Cess and Secondary Higher Education cess on CVD as well as on aggregate duties. However, it appears that appellants are not eligible to avail credit of duty paid on CVD. A show-....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 3 Education Cess on CVD 2% √ 4 SHE Cess on CVD 1% √ 5 Education Cess on Custom Duty 2% x 6 SHE Cess on Customs duty 1% x 7 Education Cess on aggregate duties 2% √ 8 SHE Cess on aggregate duties 1% √ He further submitted that the appellant has taken credit on Sl. No.2,3,4,7 and 8 as can be seen from the above table. He further submitted that the appellant is covered under the 2nd Proviso to Rule 3(7) as the clearances have been made after 7.9.2009. Under Rule 3(7) of the CCR, the goods produced or manufactured by an EOU unit availing exemption under Sl. No.2 of the Notification No.23/2003 paying excise duty leviable under Section 3 of Central Ex....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the Customs Act and the cess paid thereon. In fact, the said issue was never a part of the allegation in the show-cause notice at all. The show-cause notice was issued with proposal to deny CENVAT credit on Sl. No.3 and 4 as mentioned in table above. However, department seeks to deny the credit availed on Sl. No.1,5,6 as mentioned in table above. He also submitted that the Revenue is incorrect, both factually and legally, because the appellant has not taken any credit at all on item No.1,5,6 and therefore, the issue whether the appellant is eligible for credit on the same cannot be raised. He further submitted that it is a settled position of law that when the issue has not been raised by the Revenue in the show-cause notice, the same can....