2019 (4) TMI 436

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Rule 5 of CCR, 2004 for cenvat credit lying in balance. The adjudicating authority rejected the claim holding that the claimant failed to demonstrate that unutilised cenvat credit was in respect of inputs or input services used for manufacture of final products exported by them or intermediate products used for exports. On an appeal by the Respondents, the Appellate Commissioner allowed the appeal relying upon the Tribunal Order in case of Slovak India Trading Co. Vs. CCE 2006 (205) ELT 956 (T) as upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka reported in 2006 (201) ELT 559 (KAR) and by Apex Court reported in 2008 (223) ELT A 170 (SC). 2. Sh. T.G. Rathod, Ld. Joint Commissioner (AR) appearing for the revenue submits that refund of cenvat c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....some cases the revenue did not file appeal does not operate as bar for the revenue to prefer appeal in another cases. He relies upon the larger bench judgment in case of Steel Strip Vs. CCE 2011 (269) ELT 257 (TRI-LB) to submit that the court cannot enlarge the scope of legislation or the intention of legislature when the language of provision is clear. He also relies upon Tribunal judgment in case of Steel Strips 201 (26) STR 270 (TRI), Rasoi india Ltd. Vs. UOI 2004 (176) ELT 101 (Cal.) and Gauri Plasticulture. 3. Sh. M.H.Patil, Ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondent submits that the main reason for accumulation of credit was on revenue's insistence payment of duty from PLA. That as a result of lower margin and value addition coupled wi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... MAD. 4. He submits that in case of Dai ichi Karkarai Ltd. 1999 (112) ELT 353 (SC) and Deccan Sale Vs. R. Parthsarth 1982 (10) ELT 885 (Bom) the Hon'ble Courts have held that excise duty paid on raw material is not to be included in cost of production which means that the cost of raw material is always considered as net of modvat/ cenvat. In their case they did not load the value of finished goods with duty paid on inputs or cenvat amount, hence there is no case of unjust enrichment. He also cites the judgments viz. Birla Corporation 2005 (186) ELT 266 (SC), Novapan inds. 2007 (209) ELT 161 (SC), Jayaswals Neco Ltd. 2006 (195) ELT 142 (SC), Bouving Fouress 2006 (202) ELT 389 (SC), Bigen ind. 2006 (197) ELT 305 (SC), Suntrack Elect. 2003 (1....