2018 (2) TMI 211

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Ravichandran The appeal is against the order dated 02.02.2005 of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai. 2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Steam, Nylon chips, Nylon Filament yarn and Nylon Tyrecord fabrics liable to Central Excise duty. They were also availing Cenvat credit on various input services. Some of the final products are cleared by them on stock transfer basis wi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Excise Act, 1944. The original authority confirmed the said view. 4. The Ld. Counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that they have recovered the amount reversed in terms of Rule 6 (3) (b) from the buyer. This cannot be considered as recovery of amount representing Central Excise duty attracting the provisions of Section 11 D. She relied on the Circular dated 16.05.2008 of the Board and a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on exempted products steam in terms of Rule 6 (3) (b). This makes it clear that the appellant passed on the burden of their reversal of the amount in terms of CCR, 2002 to the buyers. The Tribunal in Unison Metals Ltd. (supra), categorically held that the amount already deposited under Rule 57 C C of the CCR, cannot be brought under Section 11 D. The amount stands already paid to the Revenue and n....