2018 (12) TMI 723

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....edit Rules (CCR), 2004 are applicable, requiring the reversal in respect of the provisions made on account of non-cenvatable, non/slow moving goods. 2.1 The appellant manufactures Pump and Parts thereof, classifiable under CETH 8413 7091, 8413 7092, 8413 8099 and 8413 9120. It is the case of the appellant that it purchases various inputs locally and also imports from outside against which it avails appropriate CENVAT Credit; the appellant generally makes a provision in its Books of Account in respect of slow-moving or non-moving materials. During the Audit, the Revenue appears to have noticed in the balance-sheet a provision for Rs. 1,89,11,146/- towards slow and non-moving items and that the Revenue demanded the reversal of Credit on th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Rs. 7,52,018/-) was supported with documentary evidences like the list of orders and factory order entry reflecting the value of order. Hence, he submitted that the recognition of income as well as the provision made in the books was only a book entry which had nothing to do with provision made for the slow or non-moving goods and that consequently, credit on the same need not be reversed. He also contended that even if for the sake of arguments Rule 3(5B) is considered, then the same applies only when credit is availed on inputs and input becomes obsolete before being put to use; that provision for such input is made in the books and such input is not removed from the factory, whereas, in the appellant's case, no CENVAT Credit was availed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to the insertion of sub-rules (5B) and (5C) in Rule 3. The Tribunal held that the case of the assessee was covered by several of its judgments which have been adverted to in para 11 of the judgment. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue has not submitted before the Court that any of those judgments have been overruled by any decision of this Court or of the Supreme Court. This case relates to a period prior to the amendment of Rule 3 by the insertion of sub-rules (5B) and (5C). In that view of the matter and for the reasons already noted, the Appeal would not raise any substantial question of law and shall accordingly stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs." 7.2 Similarly, the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... B.H.P.V. Ltd. Vs. C.C.E. - 2009 (240) E.L.T. 49 (Tri. - Bang.) dealing with a similar issue, has held as under : "5. The learned Departmental Representative referred to the Board's circular dated 16-7-2002 para 3 and also our attention was invited to the amendment in the Cenvat Credit Rules by way of Notification 26/2007, dated 11-5-2007 wherein it is stated '5B'. ‚If the value of any, (i) input, or (ii) capital goods before being put to use, on which Cenvat credit has been taken is written off fully or any provision to write off fully has been made in the books of account, then the manufacturer shall pay an amount equivalent to the Cenvat credit taken in respect of the said input or capital goods. Provided that if the said input....