Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (3) TMI 897

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ny tax is paid on such inputs, as the final product is exempted from payment of tax, the assessee would not be entitled to avail the Cenvat credit on such inputs. But the Cenvat credit availed on such inputs till the date of exemption, they vest in the assessee and the assessee cannot be divested of that credit as the law does not provide for the same. Therefore the authorities taking advantage of the notification exempting the final product cannot claim reversal of Cenvat credit either in respect of final product which have come into existence on the date of the notification or on the inputs stored in the godown or the work in progress and finished products. See Tafe Ltd. (Tractor Division) [ 2011 (3) TMI 67 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ] upheld .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f the Tribunal in the case of Albert David Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Excise, Meerut [2003 (151) E.L.T. 443 (Tri.-Del.)] was directly on the issue and the amount has to be reversed as per the provisions of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. The adjudicating authority as well as the first appellate authority after following the due process of law rejected the contentions and denied the refund to the appellants. 3. The learned counsel submits that the issue involved in this case is settled by the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore-II Vs. TAFE Ltd. (Tractors Division) reported in 2011 (268) E.L.T. 49 (Kar.) and has also been upheld by the apex court as reported in 2015 (320) E.L.T. A185 (S. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ted from payment of duty. It is the submission that the said judgment of the Tribunal was upheld by the apex court as reported in 2003 (157) E.L.T. A81 (S.C.). He submits that the lower authorities were correct in rejecting the refund claim. 5. In rejoinder, the learned counsel submits that the issue involved in this case is not regarding the demand of Cenvat credit on the inputs lying in stock or in WIP or finished goods. It is the submission that the appellants are seeking refund of the amount which they paid erroneously and the Notification No. 30/2004-C.E. is not conditional. He submits that the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Albert David Ltd. (supra) was considered by the Tribunal in the case of TAFE Ltd. and the Hon ble Hi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and 18 interpreting Rule 57A and 57J of the Central Excise Rules 1944, has held as under : 17. It is clear from these Rules, as we read them, that a manufacturer obtains credit for the excise duty paid on raw material to be used by him in the production of an excisable product immediately it makes the requisite declaration and obtains an acknowledgment thereof. It is entitled to used the credit at any time thereafter when making payment of excise duty on the excisable product. There is no provision in the Rules which provides for a reversal of the credit by the excise authorities except where it has been illegally or irregularly taken, in which event it stands cancelled or, if utilised, has to be paid for. We are here really concerne .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e assessee would not be entitled to avail the Cenvat credit on such inputs. But the Cenvat credit availed on such inputs till the date of exemption, they vest in the assessee and the assessee cannot be divested of that credit as the law does not provide for the same. Therefore the authorities taking advantage of the notification exempting the final product cannot claim reversal of Cenvat credit either in respect of final product which have come into existence on the date of the notification or on the inputs stored in the godown or the work in progress and finished products. We find that this judgment of the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka was upheld by the apex court as reported in 2015 (320) E.L.T. A185 (S.C.). 9. As regards the re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates