2013 (12) TMI 1479 - HC - Central Excise

Denial of CENVAT Credit - Held that - Tribunal after analyzing the fact found that the issue involved herein is squarely covered by the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of CCE & C, Vadodhara-I v. Chloritech Industries 2008 (7) TMI 278 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT . It is not the case before us that the aforesaid judgment of the Gujarat High Court has no application in this case. The only point argued by the learned Counsel for the appellant that the Hon ble Supreme Court has decided otherwise. - nothing is to be decided in this appeal. - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Correctness of payment of duty through Cenvat credit without sufficient balance during goods clearance.
2. Justification of CESTAT in setting aside the order of the Commissioner regarding interest under Section 11AB of Central Excise Act, 1944.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed against the judgment of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench at Bangalore, concerning the payment of duty through Cenvat credit without sufficient balance during the clearance of goods. The questions of law raised included the correctness of such payment. The High Court examined the arguments presented and reviewed the Tribunal's decision in light of a similar judgment from the Gujarat High Court. The High Court noted that the Tribunal's analysis aligned with the Gujarat High Court's decision in a specific case, and the appellant failed to provide any contrary decision from the Supreme Court. Consequently, the High Court concluded that there was no basis to challenge the Tribunal's decision, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

2. The second issue revolved around the justification of the CESTAT in setting aside the Commissioner's order concerning interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant argued against the Tribunal's decision, citing a different stance taken by the Honorable Supreme Court. However, the High Court highlighted that the appellant did not present any evidence of the Supreme Court ruling differently. As a result, the High Court found no grounds to overturn the CESTAT's decision on this matter and dismissed the appeal without any costs. The judgment concluded by stating that any pending miscellaneous petitions would also be closed in light of the appeal's dismissal.