2019 (5) TMI 207

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d their finished goods mainly, cement to SEZ developers without payment of excise duty claiming exemption under Notification No.42/2001-CE (NT), dated 26.06.2001. The department was of the view that provisions under Rule 6(6) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 are not applicable to the clearances made to SEZ developers and hence they are liable to pay 10% of the value of such goods cleared without payment of duty. Show-cause notice was issued proposing to demand duty along with interest and also for imposing penalties. After due process of law, the original authority confirmed the duty demand, interest and penalties. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside, the demand, interest and penalties. Aggrieved, the appellant is now before the Tri....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed in the appellant's own case reported in 2014 (310) ELT 170 (Tri.) as affirmed by the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in Commissioner Vs. Ultra Tech Cement Ltd. - 2015 (317) ELT A200 (AP). He relied on other decisions also. a. Sujana Metal Products Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise - 2011 (273) ELT 112 affirmed by the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in 2016 (342) ELT A115 (AP). b. Surya Roshini Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise - 2012 (285) ELT 518 c. Union of India Vs. SAIL - 2013-TIOL-384-HC-CHAT. 3. He further submitted that Rule 6 (6)(i) of CENVAT Credit Rules, which provided for exclusion of suppliers to SEZ units by a DTA, was amended to include ....