2008 (10) TMI 664 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT credit - inputs - case of the Revenue is that as the inputs are used in the manufacture of final product which attracts Nil rate of duty, therefore, respondents are not entitled for taking credit - Held that - the manufacturer is eligible to take credit in respect of input credit of duty paid on inputs which are used in the manufacture of final product being exported in respect of the fact that final products are otherwise exempted - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against refund of duty paid for inputs used in manufacturing exported goods; Entitlement of credit when final product attracts Nil rate of duty; Requirement of bond or Letter of Undertaking for export; Interpretation of Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against the order allowing a refund of duty paid on inputs used in manufacturing exported goods. The Revenue argued that since the final product attracted Nil rate of duty, the manufacturer was not entitled to credit for duty paid on inputs. Additionally, the Revenue contended that no bond or Letter of Undertaking was necessary for goods attracting Nil rate of duty, hence the refund was not admissible.

Upon examination, it was found that Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules entitles a manufacturer to a refund when inputs are used in final products cleared for export under bond or Letter of Undertaking. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s Repro India Ltd. vs. Union of India clarified this issue. The Court emphasized that even if the final product attracted Nil rate of duty, liabilities would arise if the goods were not exported, necessitating the need for a bond or undertaking to safeguard against such liabilities.

The High Court further ruled that under Rule 6(6)(v) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, manufacturers are entitled to avail credit for inputs used in manufacturing final products for export, regardless of the final products being exempted. This decision established the eligibility of manufacturers to claim credit for duty paid on inputs used in the manufacture of exported goods, even if the final products were exempted from duty.

Moreover, the Tribunal's decisions in cases such as Punjab Stainless Steel Industries vs. CCE and CCE vs. Global Pharmatech Pvt. Ltd. supported the entitlement of exporters to claim credit for duty paid on inputs used in manufacturing goods for export. As these issues were settled by previous decisions, the Tribunal found no flaws in the impugned order and dismissed the appeal accordingly.