TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (3) TMI 985
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... value of the exempted goods, nor fulfilled the conditions and followed the procedure laid down under sub-rule (3A) of the Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules. The appellants had reversed Cenvat credit on account of Cenvat earned on inputs used in the manufacture of exempted goods of Rs. 35,61,074/- for the period April 2008 to September 2008, Rs. 50,43,754/- for the period October 2008 to March 2009 and Rs. 37,32,605/- for the period April 2009 to December 2009. However, the Revenue felt that the such amounts were not as per the formula prescribed in sub-rule (3A)(b) of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules. It was also the Revenue s stand that the appellants were required to determine and pay amount provisionally for every month, if they opted to pay amount equal to Cenvat credit attributable to input services used in the exempted goods. However, they did not pay any amount on monthly basis as per the provisions of Rule 6(3A) of Cenvat Credit Rules. Accordingly, they were required to pay an amount equal to the 10% of the value of the exempted goods under sub-rule (3)(i) of Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, which is recoverable from them. The matter was adjudicated and in the adjudication orde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o the dealing hand. The contention of the appellants is that they had delivered the letter to the dispatch clerk. Since, the receipt of the letter in Range Office has not been contested, we find that the objection of the Revenue is frivolous and the intimation of closing balances submitted to Range Office by the appellants was required to be taken into the account by the Revenue. Further, the objection regarding late filing of the closing balances is also untenable because the Rule 6(3A) does not prescribe any time limit for filing of such a declaration or intimation. Hence, considering that the intimation regarding closing balances was submitted within three days of filing their option, it appears that the same has been done within the reasonable period and the Revenue s contention in this regard is not tenable. We also find that another ground on which the Ld. adjudicating authority has confirmed the demand is that the monthly payment on provisional basis according to the formula prescribed under Rule 6(3A) was not done. We find that the Board s Circular dt. 09.05.2008 laid down that the calculation of Cenvat credit attributed to inputs is to be done on the basis of actual consum....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d service i.e. sale of car. In our view, three options have been provided under Rule 6(3) and it is up to the assessee that which option has to be availed. Revenue could not insist the appellant to avail a particular option. In the present case the appellant have admittedly availed option as provided under Rule 6(3)(ii) and paid an amount as required under sub-rule (3A) of Rule 6. As regard the compliance of the procedure and conditions as laid down for availing option as provided under sub-rule (3)(ii), we find that foremost condition is that the appellant is required to pay an amount as per the formula provided under sub-rule (3A) on monthly basis. However, we find that as per the provision, payment on monthly basis is provisional basis, therefore it is not mandatory that whole amount or part of the amount was required to be paid on every month. The appellant though belatedly calculated the amount required to be paid in terms provided under sub-rule (3A) of Rule 6, therefore to fulfill the condition, assessee should pay the said amount, which has been complied by the appellant. 5.2 As regard the delay in payment, if any, the appellant have discharged the interest liabili....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... provided under Rule 6(3)(i) shall be compulsorily made applicable, therefore we are of the view that Revenue could not insist the appellant to avail a particular option. In the present case admittedly it is appellant who have on their own opted for option provided under Rule 6(3)(ii). The meaning of the option as argued by the Ld. Sr. Counsel is that option of right of choosing, something that may be or is chosen, choice, the act of choosing . From the said meaning of the term option , it is clear that it is the appellant who have liberty to decide which option to be exercised and not the Revenue to decide the same. 5.4 We find that the appellant admittedly paid an amount of Rs. 4,06,785/- plus interest, this is not under dispute. Therefore in our view, the appellant have complied with the condition prescribed under Rule 6(3)(ii) read with sub-rule (3A) of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, therefore demand of huge amount of Rs. 24,71,93,529/- of the total value of the vehicle amounting to. Rs. 494,38,70,577/- sold in the market cannot be demanded. We are also of the view that Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules is not enacted to extract illegal amount from the assessee. The ma....