2020 (1) TMI 580

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppellants have been claiming partial duty exemption under notification No.29/2004-CE dated 9th July 2019 in respect of goods cleared for exports; they were also availing total duty exemption under notification 30/2004-CE dated 9th July 2019. The duty exemption under 30/2004 was subject to the condition that no CENVAT credit is availed on the duty paid on the inputs after the issue of circular 845/3/2007-CX dated 1.2.2007. The appellants have taken the credit of benefits after a gap of 2 years alleging that the credit has to be taken immediately after the end of the quarter and not after 2 years. Department has issued a show cause notice to disallow the credit of Cenvat taken by the appellants. The show cause noticed dated 20.11.2008 was iss....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r submits that as held in Suchitra Components Ltd. 2007 (208) ELT 321 (SC) and Bezal Pharma Pvt.Ltd 2008 TIOL (89)- CESTAT-Mum-LG, circular will apply retrospectively as there is no change in law, the circular should be in the nature of clarifications; the only requirement for which to apply retrospectively is that it must be beneficial to the trade. 4. Learned counsel further submits that the Supreme Court in the case of Ramadey Micro Nutrients 1996 (87)ELT 19 (SC), held that circulars issued by the Board are binding on the department. He further submits that Tribunal in the case of Cadila Health Care Ltd CCE 2009 (248) ELT 311 held that if there are common inputs used in the manufacture of exempted goods and the goods chargeable to dut....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ular one gets understanding the circular is trying to clarify a situation which was already existing; it does not in any way create situation and clarify for future. We find that another objection raised by the department is that the credit was taken belatedly in 2007; as clarified by the Board's circular in the year 2004 (supra) the appellants were not eligible to avail credit and the admissibility of the credit were both notifications are availed was clarified only in 2007 it is not understood as to how the appellants could have taken credit before 2007; moreover we are in total agreement with the appellant's contention that if the credit can be taken immediately at the end of the month, it can be taken after end the year or at the end of....