TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 855X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of AUREOLA CHEMICALS LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, INDORE [ 2004 (1) TMI 244 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI] has held that the goods cleared by the then appellant i.e. spent sulphuric acid was cleared against CT-3 bond to the fertilizer manufacturer. The sulphuric acid was denied to be called as exempted product or the product chargeable to NIL rate of duty. Provisions of erstwhile Rule 57CC/Rule 6 of CENVAT Credit Rules were not held applicable. As per provisions of Chapter X Central Excise Rules 1944 and Rule 6 of CENVAT Credit Rules, anyone who wants to seek benefit of the provisions has to make an application in a proper form. On being satisfied, the Commissioner may extend the benefit of provision to the said specified industry. Thus the object of both the provisions is clear and the only difference is that Chapter X uses the word remission of duty on excisable goods and Central Excise Rules 2001 used the word exemption of duty to excisable goods . None of these words have been defined in the Central Excise Act. From the definition of exempted goods, it is clear that good may either be exempted from payment of any duty or was not charged to duty. In the pres ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the period from January 2016 to March 2017 was proposed to be recovered vide Show-cause notice bearing No. 34/2017 dated 22/08/2017 while invoking Rule 6(3) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004. The said proposal was initially confirmed vide order-in-original bearing No. 01/2018 dated 21/02/2018. The appeal thereof has been rejected vide the aforesaid mentioned order under challenge. 2. I have heard learned counsel Shri A. Sarveswar Rao for the appellant and Shri N. Bhanu Kiran learned A.R. for the Revenue. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that dissolved acetylene gas is excisable good which attracts central excise duty @ 14% as per central excise tariff under sub- heading 2091-2910. Accordingly, the appellant has discharged the duty liability on the goods removed from its factory except on the goods removed based on Form-I furnished by M/s HSL by furnishing information under Central Excise (Removal of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable goods) Rules 2001. In view of Notification No. 82/84-CE dated 31/03/1984. It is mentioned that the demand of the authorities pursuant to Rule 6(3)(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules against the value of goods cleared without ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble goods) Rules 2001. It is not in dispute that the said procedure has been complied with and the appellant has cleared the non-dissolved acetylene gas to M/s HSL after receiving the certificates. In the given circumstance it has to be adjudicated as to whether provisions of Rule 6 (3) of Cenvat Credit Rules shall be applicable to the present transactions. For that purpose the rule has to be looked into, which is as follows:- Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rules (1) and (2), the manufacturer of goods or the provider of output service, opting not to maintain separate accounts, shall follow any one of the following options, as applicable to him, namely:- i) Pay an amount equal to six percent of value of the exempted goods and services; or ii) Pay an amount as determined under sub-rule (3A); or iii) Maintain separate accounts for receipt, consumption and inventory of inputs as provided for in clause (a) of sub-rule (2), take Cenvat credit only on inputs under sub-clauses (ii) and (iv) of said clause (a) and pay an amount as determined under sub-rule (3A) in respect of input services. The provisions of sub-clauses (i) and (ii) of clause (b) and sub-c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o in the case of Auriola Chemicals Ltd Vs CCE Indore (2004(175) ELT 148 (Tri-Del)] has held that the goods cleared by the then appellant i.e. spent sulphuric acid was cleared against CT-3 bond to the fertilizer manufacturer. The sulphuric acid was denied to be called as exempted product or the product chargeable to NIL rate of duty. Provisions of erstwhile Rule 57CC/Rule 6 of CENVAT Credit Rules were not held applicable. The appellant therein was held not required to reverse 10% of the value of the goods cleared. The similar decision has been followed by the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Dharmsi Morarji Chemical Co. Ltd reported at [2010(255)ELT 314(Tri-Mum)]. Ten other final orders of this Tribunal as have been tabled in the written submissions of the appellant i.e. Sl.No. Period Appeal No. Order date 1. 2/2005 to 7/2008 E/1047/2009 07/09/2017 2. 8/2008 to 1/2009 E/2093/2012 3. 2/2009 to 1/2010 E/291/2012 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the manufacture of the final product in that case were already granted exemption from payment of duty under Notification No 6/2000 due to which it was held in that case that once the product is exempted from payment of duty, question of remission of duty under chapter X of Central Excise Rules may not arise. Apparently this is also not the fact of the present case. Dissolved acetylene gas is not provided any exemption from duty. Apparently and admitted the appellant is clearing the said product on payment of duty @14% except for M/s HSL. Hence the peculiar and distinguished fact of the present case is that it was not the manufactured gas which was subject to exemption but M/s HSL was entitled to exemption while buying said excisable product. 8. Finally coming to the recent decision of this Tribunal dated 03/06/2019 wherein the contentions of the department have been considered and applicability of Rule-6 upon the appellant clearing the dissolved acetylene gas without payment of duty to M/s HSL has been allowed. I have perused the decision and it is observed that the findings have been arrived at on the ground that Chapter X Central Excise Rules 1944 stands superseded by Noti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty or where the amount of the bond is inadequate, the Commissioner may, in his discretion, demand a fresh bond; and may, if the security furnished for a bond is not adequate, demand additional security. Sections 1 2 of the Central Excise (Removal of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules 2001 read as follows: 1) These rules may be called the Central Excise (Removal of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules 2001. 2) They extend to the whole of India 3) They shall come into force on and from the 1st day of July 2001. 2. Application:- These rules shall apply to a manufacturer who intends to avail of the benefit of a notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 5A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) granting exemption of duty to excisable goods (hereinafter referred to as subject goods) when used for the purpose specified in that notification. 3. Application by the manufacturer to obtain the benefit- (1) A manufacturer who intends to receive subject goods for specified use at concessional rate of duty, shall make an applicat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
