Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2023 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (8) TMI 601 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT Credit - imported inputs - inputs were not received in the factory and cleared out-and-out from the place of import to the customers’ premises - processes undertaken by the appellant on the inputs amounts to manufacture or not - HELD THAT:- The approach of the Department is ambivalent and not clear as which charge they intend to pursue for denying the cenvat credit availed by the appellant on imported inputs. Both stands taken by the Department are contrary to each other. If the Department alleges that the inputs were not received in the factory and leads evidence in this regard, then there was no need to make an allegation that after receipt of the inputs in the factory, the inputs then subjected to certain processes do not result into ‘manufacture’ as defined under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Assailing the stand of the Department that the inputs have not been received in the factory, the learned advocate for the appellant furnished data relating to activity of manufacture carried out by them i.e. amounts spent on electricity consumption, fuel consumption, factory overheads etc., which indicate that processes on the inputs were undertaken in their factory premises after the inputs brought into their factory. Also, the statements of two transporters relied upon by the learned Commissioner do not inspire confidence inasmuch as further investigation was not carried out by the Department and the transporters have not categorically claimed to have not transported the goods during the period they have employed by the appellant. Besides, the statements of two transporters among 13 to 14 transporters cannot be generalised and made applicable to the entire period - the alternative argument pursued by the Department in denying the credit that the processes do not result into manufacture needs to be examined. In THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE VERSUS AJINKYA ENTERPRISES [2012 (7) TMI 141 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT], the Bombay High Court taking note of the arguments of the Revenue more or less in the same line observed that Once the duty on final products has been accepted by the department, CENVAT credit availed need not be reversed even if the activity does not amount to manufacture. There are no merit in the impugned orders - the impugned orders are set aside and the appeals are allowed with consequential relief.
|