2017 (12) TMI 212

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Present Shri H.C. Saini, DR for the respondent ORDER Per: V. Padmanabhan The appeal is filed against the Order-in-Appeal no.08/2015 dated 14.08.2015. 2. The appellant is a manufacturer of parts and components of automobiles. During the period under dispute i.e. July 2013 to April 2014, the appellant was availing area based exemption under notification no.50/2003-CE dated 10.06.2003. In....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... with interest. Aggrieved by the impugned order the present appeal has been filed. 3. With the above background we have heard Shri Paresh Sheth, Advocate for the appellant and Shri H.C. Saini, DR for the respondent. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that even though they were availing area based exemption, they paid duty on the goods which were exported. Consequently, they will ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....for the Revenue justified the impugned order. He argued that the appellant is enjoying area based exemption for all their finished products and are not required to pay excise duty. Consequently, they are not entitled to take Cenvat Credit of any excise duty paid on their inputs. 7. After hearing both the sides and perusal of the record, we note that the appellant enjoys full exemption from paym....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....utiable final products / output service. Rule 6(6) specifies that such restriction shall not be applicable in a few cases including clearance for export under bond. The claim of the appellant is that they should be allowed the Cenvat Credit even though the goods have been exported on payment of duty and not under bond. Such claim has been denied by the adjudicating authority. We find that the pres....