TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (5) TMI 649
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to avail exemption Notification No.30/2004-CE dated 09/07/2004 or otherwise. Central Government issued two notifications, No.29/2004-CE and 30/2004-CE on the same date, wherein specified goods of Chapter 50 to 63 was exempted from whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon subject to the provisions that Notification No.30/2004-CE will be available to any assessee, provided the assessee has not availed CENVAT credit of the duty paid on inputs under the CENVAT Credit Rules 2002/2004, as the case may be. It was the case of Revenue in the show cause notice that respondent had availed CENVAT credit on the common inputs which are used for the manufacture of textile and textile articles and accordingly, they are not eligible for the said benefit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....notification should be strictly construed and conditions thereof should be complied if assessee wishes to avail the benefit of the same. He also relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in Cheviot Company Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata VII 2010 (255) ELT 139 (Tri.-Kolkata) wherein similar issue of availment of benefit under Notification No.30/2004-CE was addressed to and held against the assessee. 5. Learned Counsel, on the other hand, would submit that identical issue was decided by Principal Bench in the case of Spentex Industries Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Indore 2016 (338) ELT 614 (Tri.-Del.) and Omkar Textile Mills Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad I 2014 (311) ELT 587 (Tri-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the case of Hello Minerals Water (P) Ltd. v. UOI (supra) where it was held that reversal can be made after clearance of goods also and benefit of Notification No.15/94-C.E., dated 1-3-1994 was held to be admissible. C.B.E. & C. vide Circular No.858/16/2007-CX, dated 8-11-2007, also clarified that in view of Supreme Court's judgment in the case of CCE, Mumbai-I v. Bombay Dyeing Ltd. [2007 (215) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.)], also relied upon by the appellant, Cenvat credit reversed later is sufficient for exemption under Notification No. 30/2004-C.E., dated 9-7-2004. Accordingly, the issue of reversal of Cenvat credit for the entitlement of Notification No.30/2004-C.E. was settled at rest in view of the law laid down by Gujarat High Court and only v....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of the appellants that as per submissions dated 20-8-2013 filed by the Department now a credit of Rs. 55,94,675/-, Rs. 18,89,252/- and Rs. 19,77,942/- has been shown to be the balance credit required to be reversed by Appellant Nos.1, 2 & 3 respectively. Though, it was not a subject matter of the show cause notices whether the quantum of credit reversed by the appellants was correct or not but by virtue of order dated 12-10-2010, this Bench granted the liberty to quantify the exact credit required to be reversed and whether appellants have reversed such credit correctly in view of the judgments of Gujarat High Court in the case of CCE, Ahmedabad-II v. Maize Products (supra) and CCE v. Ashima Dyecot (supra) which were delivered in the year....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e 6 is legally sustainable. The said sub-rule provides for a deeming provision to the effect that payment of amount under sub-rule (3) should be considered as credit not taken for the purpose of such exemption notification. The appellant's case is covered by the said provision as pointed out by the ld. Counsel for the appellant even before the introduction of the said sub-rule in 2011. The Tribunal held that payment of amount under sub-rule (3)(i) of Rule 6 will make the assessee eligible for claiming such exemption as the present one. We find the case laws relied on by the ld. Counsel for the appellants clearly support their contention. The decisions of the Tribunal in Life Long Appliances Ltd. (supra), was affirmed by the Hon'ble Supr....