2009 (6) TMI 462 - AT - Central Excise

Cenvat Credit-Storage of input outside factory of manufacturer- Assessee a manufacturer closed down its unit and shifted to other place. Assessee removed inputs and finished goods by issue of invoice and availed credit in its new premises. The assessee in compliance to the directions of the jurisdictional Central Excise Officers debited the said amount. Thereafter the assessee approached the Central Excise officer to allow them the re-credit of such amount by letter dated 18.06.2005. Commissioner(Appeals) allow the transfer of credit under rule 8 of the Cenvat Credit Rules in respect of the credit reversed by them on 26.02.2005. Held that- it is required to decide the present matter after considering the letter dated 18.06.2005 of the appellant thus the matter is remanded back.

Issues:
1. Transfer of credit under rule 8 of the Cenvat Credit Rules.
2. Validity of demand for wrongly availed Cenvat credit.
3. Decision on request for transfer of credit.

Transfer of Credit under Rule 8 of the Cenvat Credit Rules:
The appellants, engaged in manufacturing PU Foam, shifted their unit to a new location in October 2001 and obtained a new registration certificate for manufacturing excisable goods. They informed the Department about this change and filed RT-12 Return showing the transfer of inputs and finished goods from the old unit to the new one. Subsequently, they were directed by Central Excise Officers to debit an amount of Rs. 2,20,508 based on an Audit letter. The appellants complied under protest and later requested the Dy. Commissioner to allow the transfer of credit under rule 8 of the Cenvat Credit Rules. However, no decision was made in this regard. The Tribunal found that justice required a decision considering the appellants' request, setting aside the impugned order and remanding the matter to the Original Authority for a fresh decision after reviewing the letter dated 18-6-2005. The appellants were directed to provide all documents and detailed submissions, with the Original Authority instructed to provide a hearing opportunity before deciding, ultimately allowing the appeal by way of remand.

Validity of Demand for Wrongly Availed Cenvat Credit:
The jurisdictional Central Excise Officers directed the appellants to debit Rs. 2,20,508 in compliance with an Audit letter. Subsequently, a show-cause notice was issued proposing recovery of the amount as the appellants re-credited it suo motu. The Original Authority confirmed the demand for wrongly availed Cenvat credit along with interest, a decision upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). However, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, remanding the matter back to the Original Authority for a fresh decision after considering the appellants' request for transfer of credit under rule 8 of the Cenvat Credit Rules. The appellants were instructed to present all relevant documents and provide detailed submissions, with the Original Authority directed to offer a hearing opportunity before reaching a decision, ultimately allowing the appeal by way of remand.

Decision on Request for Transfer of Credit:
The appellants had requested the Dy. Commissioner of Central Excise to allow the transfer of credit under rule 8 of the Cenvat Credit Rules concerning the amount they had reversed earlier. However, no decision was made regarding this request. The Tribunal deemed it necessary for the ends of justice to have a decision made after considering the appellants' letter dated 18-6-2005. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Original Authority for a fresh decision post-reviewing the said letter. The appellants were directed to furnish all pertinent documents and elaborate submissions, with the Original Authority mandated to provide a hearing opportunity before reaching a decision, thereby allowing the appeal by way of remand.

← Previous Next →