TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (7) TMI 945
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t have cleared cement from above factories to developers of Special Economic Zone (SEZ) during April 2007 to December 2008. The said clearances of cement to Special Economic Zone developers were made without payment of excise duty under bond/LUT in accordance with the provisions of Section 26(1)(c) of the Special Economic Zone Act, 2005 read with Rule 30 of the Special Economic Zone Rules, 2006 and Rule 19 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The case of the department is that during the relevant period the provisions of Rule 6 (3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was applicable in respect of supplies made to SEZ. Accordingly the respondent is liable to pay an amount equal to 10% of the value of the cement cleared to SEZ developers under Rule 6(3)(b)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0 (P & H) (g) C.C.E. vs. Fosroc Chemicals (India) Pvt. Limited - 2015 (318) ELT 240 (Kar.) (h) Vijayaa Steels Limited vs. C.C.E.- 2021 (10) TMI 185-CESTAT (i) Tulsyan Nec Limited vs. C.C.E. - 2022 (4) TMI 199-CESTAT (j) Saurashtra cement Limited vs. C.C.E. - 2013 (7) TMI 756-CESTAT (k) Sujana Metal Products Limited vs. CCE 0 2011 (273) ELT 112 (T) (l) Commissioner vs. Sujana Metal Products Limited - 2016 (342) ELT A115 (AP) (m) U.O.I. vs. Kamalakshi Finance Corporation Limited - 1991 (55) ELT 433 (S.C.) (n) C.C.E. vs. Lotus Power Gears (P) Limited - 2017 (346) ELT 347 (Kar.) He submits that this issue is no more res-integra as of now and is settled in the case of Pankaj Extrusion Limited (supra) as well as by different benc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....:- "(i) cleared to a unit in a special economic zone or to a developer of a special economic zone for their authorized operations; or". 5. From the above amendment, it can be seen that amendment is by way of substitution in Rule 6 (6)(i) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. It is settled law that any amendment brought by way of substitution is treated as if the said amendment was existing even prior to the date of amendment and accordingly the benefit of said amendment can be extended for the past period retrospectively. Moreover, in the present case, the supplies made to SEZ is always considered as export therefore, against the export demand equal to 10% value of goods supplied to SEZ is otherwise not sustainable. This issue has been consider....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Rule 6(3)(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 is maintainable in respect of goods supplied to SEZ Developers during the period 2005-08. 2. Shri Narendra Pati, Learned C.A. appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that this issue has been settled by various judgments of this Tribunal according to which the demand of Cenvat credit under Rule 6 is not sustainable, even prior to 31-12-2008 when the Rule 6 was amended vide Notification No. 50/2008-C.E. (N.T). He placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore-III v. Lotus Power Gears (P) Ltd. - 2017 (346) E.L.T. 347 (Kar.). 3. Shri A.B. Kulgod, Learned Asstt. Commissioner (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dit Rules, are not satisfied in the present case. Hence, the finished goods cleared by the appellants to the contractors of SEZ units/SEZ developers are not exempted goods. Accordingly, the provisions of Rule 6(1), 6(2) and 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 are not attracted in the present case. 6. The appellant also relies on the ruling of the Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh in the case of UOI v. Steel Authority of India Ltd. - 2013 (297) E.L.T. 166 (CG), wherein the question involved was whether "the benefit provided by the substituted sub-rule 6(6)(i) in the 2004 Rules can be availed on the date prior to its substitution in the 2004 Rules or not and whether the substituted sub-rule 6(6)(v) is retrospective or not." The facts in that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ith Sections 76A to 76H was inserted. Subsequently, the SEZ Act was enacted and Chapter XA of the Customs Act was deleted. 34. Section 2 of the SEZ Act is titled 'Definitions'. It provides as follows : * Sub-section (g) of Section 2 [sub-section 2(g)] of the SEZ-Act defines 'developer'. It means a person or a State, which is granted a letter of approval under sub-section (10) of section 3 [Section 3(10)] of the SEZ Act by the Central Government and includes an authority and a co-developer; * Sub-section (m) of Section 2 [sub-section 2(m)] defines the word 'export'. It means supplying goods, or providing services, from the domestic tariff area to a unit or developer. * Sub-section (zc) of Section 2 [sub-section 2(zc)] defines the wor....