2009 (2) TMI 153

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... various stages of production of final products. At the instance of the department, the appellants reversed CENVAT credit relatable to the final products, inputs and inputs at various stages of work-in-progress, net of the credit balance. Subsequently, they claimed refund of the amounts paid for the reason that they were not required to reverse CENVAT credit availed when the final products were exempted subsequently. Relying on decisions of the Tribunal, the Commissioner (Appeals) decided that the appellants were not required to reverse the CENVAT credit availed in respect of inputs which had been issued for manufacture and were at different stages of manufacture including the final products. He ordered that the appellants were entitled to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the facts of the case and the submissions made by both sides. The dispute relates to admissibility of credit relatable to in puts and inputs contained finished goods and work-in-progress when the final products are exempted after the said credit was availed/utilized in accordance with statutory provisions. I find that the Apex Court had dealt with the issue in its judgment in the case of Collector v. Dai Ichi Karkaria Ltd. [1999 (112) E.L.T. 353 (S.C.)] and had observed as follows:- "It is clear from these Rules, as we read them, that a manufacturer obtains credit for the excise duty paid on raw material to be used by him in the production of an excisable product immediately it makes the requisite declaration and obtains an acknowledgeme....