2014 (10) TMI 877 - AT - Central Excise

Eligibility of CENVAT Credit on the basis of a certificate dated-29/11/2011 issued by Dy. Commissioner of Customs relating to eleven bills of entry against which the goods were imported by the appellant in the year 2006 to 2008 - Penalty imposed under Rule 15 read with Section 11AC of CEA, 1944 - Held that - It is the claim of the appellant that even though initially it was brought under advance license scheme, but later duty was discharged in the year 2011 and the same were taken for manufacture of goods meant for local clearances. We find from the submission of the appellant that the goods all along had been kept and later used in the manufacture of the finished goods. This aspect was not examined being not placed before the Ld. Commissioner alongwith the documents. Both sides agree that these facts need to be verified by the adjudicating authority. In the result, we find that it is a fit case of remand to the Ld. Commissioner for determination of the issues afresh after taking into consideration, the evidences on record and that would be produced by the appellant. It is made clear that all issues are kept open.Needless to mention that a reasonable opportunity of hearing be granted to the Appellant

Summary

Issues:
Seeking waiver of CENVAT Credit and penalty under Rule 15 read with Section 11AC of CEA, 1944.

Analysis:
The application filed sought waiver of CENVAT Credit of Rs. 3.48 Crores and the corresponding penalty. The petitioner availed the credit based on a certificate issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, certifying payment of Additional duty of Customs against bills of entry from 2008. The Commissioner denied credit, stating that goods imported under the advance license scheme in 2006-2008 could not be used for export obligation fulfillment. The petitioner argued that the imported goods were utilized in manufacturing finished products, supported by the Deputy Commissioner's certificate.

The advocate emphasized that the imported goods were used for manufacturing after duty payment, meeting Rule 9(1) requirements. The Revenue's representative noted that the goods remained in the factory until 2011, a point not raised earlier. The Tribunal decided to dispose of the appeal, waiving pre-deposit requirements. The central issue was the eligibility of CENVAT Credit based on the Deputy Commissioner's certificate for goods imported from 2006-2008. The appellant claimed the goods were used for local clearances after duty payment in 2011. Both parties agreed on the need for verification by the adjudicating authority.

The Tribunal remanded the case to the Commissioner for a fresh determination, considering all evidence and documents. The Commissioner was instructed to provide a reasonable opportunity for the appellant to present their case. The appeal was allowed by way of remand, with all issues left open for further consideration.