This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
No reversal under Cenvat rule 6 is required in case of clearances to SEZ unit/developers
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- Ashlyn Enterprises Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Bangalore)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Courts
- All CESTAT, CESTAT Bangalore
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
CESTAT, BANGALORE BENCH
Ashlyn Enterprises
versus
Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore
P.G. CHACKO, JUDICIAL MEMBER
Central Excise Appeal NO. 483 OF 2011
Date of Pronouncement – 07.11.2012
ORDER
1. In this appeal filed by the assessee, the challenge is against a demand raised on the appellant in terms of Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 for the period from July to December 2008. During the said period, the appellant (a unit in the domestic tariff area) had cleared their products to SEZ developers/units. During the same period they had also cleared their products to the DTA...
