Case Law Details
Commissioner Vs Orient Syntex (Prop. APM Industries Ltd.) (CESTAT Delhi)
We find that there is no dispute on the fact that the respondent has opted for exemption Notification No.30/2004-CE, which carries the following conditions:-
“Provided that nothing contained in this Notification, which shall apply to the goods in respect of which credit of duty on inputs has been taken under the provisions of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.”
As per the above condition, the exemption Notification No. 30/2004-CE is not an absolute exemption. On the plain reading of Rule 11 (3) (i) (ii), it is clear that as per sub-clause (2), the credit shall be lapsed only if the exemption under the Notification is absolute that means in case of conditional Notification the provision of lapsing of credit will not apply.
it is settled that after reversal of credit in respect of input, input in process and input contained in final products whatever balance is left shall lapse only when the Notification is unconditional. As regards, the judgment relied upon by the learned Authorised Representative, on careful consideration, we find that the issue involved in such case was eligibility of exemption Notification No. 30/2004-CE. Though some observation was made by the Hon’ble Bench, however, no final decision was given on the said issue, as the said issue was not the subject matter of the appeal.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
