Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Emure Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs Cce Pune on 3 March, 2011
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI
COURT NO. II
APPEAL NO. E/458/09 Mum
Arising out of Order-in-Original No. 04/CEX/2009 dated 05.02.2009 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune.
For approval and signature:
Shri. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial)
Shri. P.R. Chandrasekharan, Member (Technical)
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see : No
the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the : No
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication
in any authoritative report or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : Seen
of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental : Yes
authorities?
Emure Pharmaceuticals Ltd.,
:
Appellant
Versus
CCE Pune
Respondent
Appearance Shri Bharat Rai Chandani, Advocate for appellant Shri K. Lal, SDR For Respondent CORAM:
Shri. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Shri. P.R. Chandrasekharan, Member (Technical) Date of Hearing : 03.03.11 Date of Decision : 03.03.11 ORDER NO.
Per : M.V. Ravindran This appeal is filed against the order-in-original No. 04/CEX/2009 dated 05.02.2009.
2. Heard both sides and perused the records.
3. The issue involved in this case is regarding reversal of CENVAT credit taken on input and input services which have been utilized for manufacture of dutiable as well as exempted goods. The adjudicating authority has confirmed the demand and imposed penalty equivalent to amount demanded and also directed the appellant to pay interest on the amount confirmed.
4. The learned Counsel for the appellant submit that consequent to retrospective amendment to Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, by the Finance Act, 2010, they are required to reverse the CENVAT credit taken on input and input service which are utilised for the manufacture of exempted products. It is his submission that vide an application dated 02.08.2010 they had given the details to the learned Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune I Commissionarate, showing the amounts attributable to the input service which were utilised for the manufacture of the exempted goods, indicating also the amount paid by the appellant along with interest. He would also submit that vide letter from the office of the Superintendent, the in-Charge of the factory of the appellant, it is indicated that the Commissioner has accepted the application made by the assessee.
5. The learned DR submits that in view of the retrospective amendment the matter needs to be considered by the learned Commissioner to verify the details.
6. At this juncture, the learned Counsel submits that the issue regarding retrospective amendment which he himself undertook to provide the details to the Commissioner along with a Chartered Accounts Certificate. We find it so. In view of the above, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the learned Commissioner to pass an appropriate order of acceptance of the details given by the appellant as regards reversal and interest. Appeal is allowed by way of remand.
(Pronounced in open Court) (P.R. Chandrasekharan) Member (Technical) (M.V. Ravindran) Member (Judicial) nsk 3