Page 122 - GSTL_3rd September 2020_Vol 40_Part 1

56 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 40
2020 (40) G.S.T.L. 56 (Tri. - Del.)

IN THE CESTAT, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
[COURT NO. IV]
S/Shri Ramesh Nair, Member (J) and Raju, Member (T)
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE & CGST, ALWAR
Versus
ORIENT SYNTEX
Final Order No. A/50637/2020-EX(DB), dated 20-2-2020 in Appeal
No. E/52906/2019-DB
Cenvat credit - Lapse of credit - Assessee availing exemption Notifica-
tion No. 30/2004-C.E. and reversing credit amounting to ` 54,85,417 attributable
to input, input contained in work in progress and finished goods in stock -
Accumulated balance of Cenvat credit available after reversal - Credit to be
lapsed only if exemption under Notification absolute that means in case of
conditional Notification provision of lapsing of credit will not apply - Setting
aside of demand by Commissioner (Appeals) to be affirmed - Rule 11 of Cen-
vat Credit Rules, 2004. [paras 7, 8, 9]
Appeal dismissed
CASES CITED
Commissioner v. Sitaram India Ltd. — 2018 (10) TMI 11-CESTAT, New Delhi — Referred ......... [Para 3]
Jansons Taxtile Processors v. Commissioner
— 2018 (7) TMI 850-CESTAT, Chennai — Referred ................................................................... [Para 3]
Kanchan India Ltd. v. Commissioner
— 2019 (1) TMI 310-CESTAT, New Delhi — Relied on ...................................................... [Paras 3, 7.2]
Mahabir Jute Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner — Final Order Nos. 71798-71800/2018,
dated 27-7-2018 — Referred ............................................................................................................ [Para 3]
Patodia Filaments Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner
— 2019 (4) TMI 435-CESTAT, Ahmedabad — Relied on ................................................... [Paras 3, 7.1]
Patodia Filaments Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner
— 2019 (8) TMI 201-CESTAT, Ahmedabad — Referred ........................................................... [Para 3]
Supertex Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner
— 2016 (332) E.L.T. 755 (Tribunal) — Distinguished .......................................................... [Paras 2, 9]
Wearit Global Ltd. v. Commissioner — 2018 (8) TMI 1094-CESTAT, New Delhi — Referred ...... [Para 3]
REPRESENTED BY : Shri Hemant Bajaj and Ms. Sukriti Das, Advocates,
for the Appellant.
Shri O.P. Bisht, Authorised Representative, for the
Respondent.
[Order per : Ramesh Nair, Member (J)]. - The respondents are engaged
in the manufacture of polyester yarn falling under Chapter 55 of the Central Ex-
cise Tariff Act, 1985. They have opted for exemption Notification No. 30/2004-
C.E., dated 9-7-2004 w.e.f. 1st April, 2016. In compliance to Rule 11(3)(i) of the
Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, they have reversed the Cenvat credit amounting to
Rs. 54,85,417/- attributable to input, input contained in WIP and finished goods
in the stock. After reversal of Cenvat credit, there was some accumulated balance
of Cenvat credit was available. A show cause notice was issued proposing the
demand of Cenvat credit which was lying in balance even after aforesaid reversal
GST LAW TIMES  3rd September 2020  138