2009 (6) TMI 850 - AT - Central Excise

Cenvat/Modvat - Deemed credit - Held that - The fact is that the assessee was entitled to the deemed credit in any manner either by way of refund or by way of credit. Otherwise also the credit having been earned lawfully and there being no Notification laying down reversal or lapsing of the credit the assessee get vested right to utilize the same subsequently. During the intervening period from 16-12-98 to 1-4-2000 the said credit could not be utilized on account of introduction compounded levy scheme. When the reversal of the earlier position regarding deemed credit the credit so earned by the appellant would become available for utilization - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Utilization of accumulated deemed Modvat credit after the withdrawal of the Compounded Levy Duty scheme.
2. Validity of utilizing deemed credit under Notification No. 29/96 after its rescinding and introduction of Notification No. 7/2001.
3. Interpretation of the provisions regarding lapsing of accumulated deemed Modvat credit.
4. Entitlement of the appellant to utilize accumulated deemed credit for duty payment post withdrawal of the compounded levy scheme.
5. Availability of cash refund for unutilized deemed credit under Section 11B.

Analysis:
Issue 1:
The case involves the utilization of accumulated deemed Modvat credit post the withdrawal of the Compounded Levy Duty scheme. The appellant had a balance of accumulated credit and availed additional credit under Notification No. 29/96. The Revenue objected to the utilization of this credit, arguing that it would lapse with the rescinding of the notification.

Issue 2:
The dispute centered around the validity of utilizing deemed credit under Notification No. 29/96 after its rescinding and the subsequent introduction of Notification No. 7/2001. The Commissioner (Appeals) held in favor of the appellant, emphasizing that there was no provision for the lapse of accumulated deemed Modvat credit.

Issue 3:
The interpretation of provisions regarding lapsing of accumulated deemed Modvat credit was crucial in this case. The lower authority's observation that there was no provision for the transfer of deemed credit under different notifications was deemed legally unfounded. The appellant argued that the credit remained in their records and could be utilized subsequently.

Issue 4:
The appellant contended that they were entitled to utilize the accumulated deemed credit post withdrawal of the compounded levy scheme. The Commissioner (Appeals) referenced precedent decisions and held that the appellant had a vested right to utilize the credit, either through refund or credit, as there was no provision for reversal or lapsing of the credit.

Issue 5:
The availability of cash refund for unutilized deemed credit under Section 11B was discussed. The lower authority admitted that the appellants would have been entitled to cash refund if claimed within the stipulated time. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal, emphasizing the appellant's entitlement to utilize the accumulated deemed credit.

In conclusion, the judgment favored the appellant, emphasizing their entitlement to utilize the accumulated deemed Modvat credit post the withdrawal of the Compounded Levy Duty scheme. The decision was based on legal precedents and interpretations of the provisions regarding the lapsing and utilization of deemed credit, ultimately rejecting the Revenue's appeal.