Page 192 - ELT_15th June 2020_VOL 372_Part 6th

870 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372

Chaurasia v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-III, 2013-TIOL-732-CESTAT-
MUM = 2015 (320) E.L.T. 157 (Tri.-Mumbai), (ii) HMM Coaches Limited v. Commis-
sioner of Central Excise, Panchkula, 2016 (337) E.L.T. 598 (Tri. - Chan.), (iii) M/s.
Mercedes Benz India (P) Limited v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-I, 2015-
TIOL-1550-CESTAT-MUM = 2015 (40) S.T.R. 381 (Tri.-Mumbai), (iv) Commission-
er of Central Gst and CX v. Himmat Glazed Tiles, 2018 (15) G.S.T.L. 486 (Guj.).
7. The Learned Authorized Representative for the Department, reiter-
ates the findings of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals). He submits that the appel-
lant paid the amount of Cenvat credit attributable to the input services used in
exempted services i.e. trading of GPS units but procedure was not followed in-
asmuch as in the beginning of the financial year, have not intimated in writing to
the jurisdictional Superintendent regarding the availment of the option provided
under clause (ii) of Rule 6(3). They have not furnished the information as provid-
ed under sub-clauses (i) to (v) of clause (a) of Rule 6(3A). Once the appellant be-
came disentitled for this option, the other option available is under Rule 6(3)(i).
Therefore, appellant had no other option but to follow the provisions of Rule
6(3)(i) and accordingly they were required to pay 6% of the value of the exempt-
ed services (trading of GPS units).
8. Heard both sides at length and perused the appeal records.
9. The short issue that arises for consideration in the instant appeal is
whether appellant is required to pay 6% of total sale value of the goods traded by
them in terms of Rule 6(3)(i) when the appellant paid the actual credit attributed
to the quantum trading sale in terms of Rule 6(3A) along with interest following
the option available under Rule 6(3)(ii). The relevant rule is reproduced below :
“RULE 6. Obligation of a manufacturer or producer of final prod-
ucts and a provider of output service. - (1) The Cenvat credit shall not be
allowed on such quantity of input used in or in relation to the manufacture
of exempted goods or for provision of exempted services, or input service
used in or in relation to the manufacture of exempted goods and their
clearance up to the place of removal or for provision of exempted services,
except in the circumstances mentioned in sub-rule (2) :
Provided that the Cenvat credit on inputs shall not be denied to job
worker referred to in Rule 12AA of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, on the
ground that the said inputs are used in the manufacture of goods cleared
without payment of duty under the provisions of that rule.
(2) Where a manufacturer or provider of output service avails of
Cenvat credit in respect of any inputs or input services and manufactures
such final products or provides such output service which are chargeable to
duty or tax as well as exempted goods or services, then, the manufacturer
or provider of output service shall maintain separate accounts for -
(a) the receipt, consumption and inventory of inputs used -
(i) in or in relation to the manufacture of exempted goods;
(ii) in or in relation to the manufacture of dutiable final
products excluding exempted goods;
(iii) for the provision of exempted services;
(iv) for the provision of output services excluding exempted
services; and
(b) the receipt and use of input services -
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th June 2020  192