TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1184X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Notification No.50/2003-CE dated 10.6.2003, the appellants are not required to reverse the credit in their cenvat credit account lying unutilized. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - E/3419/2006-Ex (DB) - A/60037/2017-EX[DB] - Dated:- 2-1-2017 - Mr.Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Devender Singh, Member (Technical) Shri V.K.Trehan for the appellant None for the respondent ORDER Per Ashok Jindal The Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the credit on the inputs in stock lying in their Cenvat credit account at the time of opting the area based exemption under Notification NO.50/2003-CE dated 10.6.2003. 2. Heard the learned AR. 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Ltd. (supra) , Swastik Textile Engineers Ltd. (supra) and P.S.L. Ltd. (supra). We agree with the views expressed in the said decisions. 22. In view of the above discussions, we hold that when the input-credit legally taken and utilised on the dutiable final products, need not be reversed on the final product becoming exempt subsequently w.e.f. 9-7-2004. The decision of the Bangalore Bench in the case of TAFE Ltd. (Tractor Division) v. CCE, Bangalore - 2007 (210) E.L.T. 571 (Tri.) = 2007 (79) RLT 706 (Tribunal-Bangalore) enunciated the correct position of the law. The issue is thus, answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. 23. Before we part, we observe that this order is passed without going into the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owed to be utilized for payment of duty on excisable goods, whether cleared for home consumption or for export. 8. After considering the Rule 57, the Apex Court held as follows :- 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 acknowledgement thereof. It is entitled to use 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 whic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... excisable goods, whether cleared for home consumption or for export. 10. The language of Rule 57H(5) of the Excise Rules and Rule 9(2) of the Cenvat Rules is identical, therefore, the decision also has to be similar. 11. It would also be pertinent to mention here that the High Court of Kerala in Collector of Central Excise and Custom, Cochin v. Premier Tyres Ltd. - 2001 (130) E.L.T. 417 following the judgment of the Apex Court answered a similar question in favour of the assessee and against the Department. 12. It would also be pertinent to mention that the judgment of the Tribunal in Ashok Iron and Steel Fabricators case has been upheld by the High Court of Rajasthan in Hindustan Zinc Ltd. v. Union of India, 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of excise, the assessee cannot be asked to reverse the Modvat credit already taken by it. 14. In view of the above discussion, the question is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. 8. Further, the issue has been examined by Hon ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd .wherein again the Hon ble High Court has observed as under: 9. In the said decision after taking into consideration the relevant provisions i.e. Rule 57 of Modvat credit under Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Rule 9(2) of the Cenvat Rules, as interpreted by the Apex Court in Collector of Central Excise, Pune and Others v. Dai Ichi Karkaria Lt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hindustan Zinc Limited and in P.A. precision Components, the decision in Purval and Associates was followed without considering all the points which are considered herein. 12. We are of the considered view that the Appellate Authority has failed to appreciate the ratio of law laid down by this Court in its right perspective. The decisions have been brushed aside and dealt with in a cryptic and perfunctory manner. On this aspect we refrain from saying anything further. It is not that the earlier view taken by this Court merely based upon the decisions rendered by the High Court of Rajasthan [2008 (223) E.L.T. 149 (Raj.)]. In fact this Court, while deciding the aforesaid appeals, took into account not only the relevant provisions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
