COMMISSIONER OF C. EX. & S.T., ROHTAK Vs. PARK NONWOVEN PVT. LTD.
LAWS(CE)-2015-4-17
CUSTOMS EXCISE AND GOLD(CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Decided on April 08,2015

Commissioner Of C. Ex. And S.T., Rohtak Appellant
VERSUS
Park Nonwoven Pvt. Ltd. Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS,PUNE V. SPECTRA SPECIALITY [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE VS. INDCHEM ELECTRONICS [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE VS. INDCHEM ELECTRONICS [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

ASHOK JINDAL - (1.)REVENUE is in appeal against the impugned order dropping the show cause notice which was issued to deny the Cenvat credit on inputs used in the semi -finished goods/work in progress which were lost in fire.
(2.)The facts of the case are that on 29 -2 -2010 the fire broke out in the factory of the respondent wherein semi -finished goods and work -in -progress was destroyed. The respondent filed remission claim of duty under Rule 21 of the CER, 2002 which was rejected by the learned Commissioner on the premise that the semi -finished goods and work -in -progress are not excisable, therefore, claim of remission is not sustainable.
Thereafter show cause notice was issued to the respondent to reverse the Cenvat credit on the inputs used in semi -finished goods/work -in -progress under Rule 3(5B) of the CCR, 2004. Both the lower authorities dropped the show cause notice holding that respondent is not required to reverse the Cenvat credit. Against the said order, Revenue is before me.

(3.)THE learned AR submits that both the lower authorities has passed the order beyond the allegation of show cause notice as show cause notice alleged that the respondent is required to reverse the Credit as per Rule 3(5B) of the CCR, 2004. Therefore, the impugned order is required to be set aside in the light of C.B.E. & C. Circular No. , dated 7 -12 -2009.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.