9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 145X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ORDER PER. MURALIDHAR : The appellants are manufacturers of SS Hose Assembly, Flange & Fittings. They were also engaged in processing of MS Round, TMT Bars etc. purchased from the manufacturers-suppliers. In the course of their business, they sold such MS Round, TMT Bars etc. on payment of proper Excise Duty based on the Cenvat Credit taken by them while receiving these goods. Show Cause Notice was issued for the period September 2008 to September 2010 on 30th September 2013 on the ground that they are not eligible to take the Cenvat Credit and the Excise Duty collected from their buyers is required to be recovered under Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Adjudicating Authority vide the impugned order denied the Cenvat Cred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... estion of denial of Cenvat Credit would not arise. Therefore, he submits that the Adjudicating Authority erred in confirming the demand by denying the Cenvat Credit. 4. He cites the case law of Pioneer Carbide (P) Ltd. Vs. Commr. of CGST & CX, Shillong, Final Order No. 76827/2024 dated 12.08.2024 passed by this Bench, wherein it has been held that so long as the Cenvat Credit taken has been utilized and the end product has been cleared on payment of Excise Duty, the Cenvat Credit taken cannot be denied. He also relies on the case law of R S Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Central Excise, Kol-IV, Final Order No. 76809-76810 dated 04/09/2024,wherein it has been held that when all the purchases of inputs/raw materials have been procured from ve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bly, Flange & Fittings, has also been carrying on the other business activities by way of procuring the MS Round, TMT Bars etc. After undertaking some work on them, was clearing the same to his buyers. On receipt of such materials under proper Excise Invoice from their vendors, they were taking the Cenvat Credit. At the time of clearance of these goods to their buyers, the entire Cenvat Credit taken was being reversed. 9. As a matter of fact, from the Show Cause Notice, it is seen that the demand is towards Cenvat Credit of Rs. 1,46,75,425/- and even for under Section 11D, the same amount has been demanded. It shows that the entire Cenvat Credit taken was properly reversed by them when the goods were cleared to their buyers. In such a case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T Credit of 1,63,96,895/- and paid the balance amount of Rs.7,58,271/- by cash. This shows that there has been some value addition and they have paid higher duty on the finished goods than whatever CENVAT Credit they have taken on the goods received from their vendors. The Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Bunty Foods India Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE Thane-2018-359 ELT-267 TriMumbai has held as under: "4.1 From the above Rule 16, it is seen that the assessee shall be allowed the Cenvat credit in respect of duty paid on the goods received in the factory for the purpose of remade, refined, reconditioned or for any other reasons. As per sub-rule (2) of Rule 16, it is provided that when such duty paid goods is cleared by the assessee under two situations ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so paid further Rs.7,58,271/- under PLA account while clearing the goods which they had bought from other vendors. Therefore, we find that the ratio laid down by the Tribunal in the case of Bunty Foods is squarely applicable. A careful reading of Rule 16 of CER 2002 clarifies that any goods on which duty has been paid at the time of removal can be taken as CENVAT Credit. It does not specify that the finished goods of any other third party cannot be used as input by the assessee for availing the concession of Rule 16(1), 16(2). It is clearly stated that the amount of Excise Duty paid while clearing such goods received under Rule 16(1) should be either equivalent or more than the CENVAT Credit taken. We find that this condition has been fulfi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n on account of our observations at Para 19 and 20 above, we hold that the confirmed demand is legally not sustainable. Accordingly, we allow the appeal on merits. 22. We also find considerable force in the arguments of the appellant about the time bar aspect in this case. The appellant is an assessee with the Dept. They have been taking the Cenvat Credit and also filing their Returns. It is not the case of the Dept. that any private records have been recovered towards the cash transactions. The Dept. has not brought in any evidence to the effect that any suppression has taken place from the appellant's side. Hence, we hold that the confirmed demand for the extended period is legally sustainable on account of time bar. Hence, we allow the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
