Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2012 (6) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2012 (6) TMI 694 - AT - Central Excise


Issues:
1. Interpretation of Rule 57C(1)(ii) regarding the usage of inputs for generation of electricity supplied to a 100% export-oriented unit.
2. Application of the Supreme Court judgment in Maruti Suzuki regarding the eligibility of Modvat credit for inputs used in the generation of electricity.
3. Requirement for verification of the quantity of electricity supplied to the 100% EOU and remand to the original authority for necessary action.

Analysis:
1. The Hon'ble High Court remanded the matter to the Tribunal, emphasizing the need to consider the applicability of Rule 57C(1)(ii) in a case where naphtha was used for generating electricity supplied to a 100% export-oriented unit. The Court highlighted that the issue raised by the assessee regarding the application of this rule was not previously considered by the CESTAT. Therefore, the Tribunal was directed to address this contention on its merits.

2. The High Court referred to the Supreme Court judgment in Maruti Suzuki, clarifying that if electricity generated is not wholly used within the factory of production, Modvat credit can only be availed proportionately. The Court concluded that the CESTAT's order, which allowed Modvat credit for naphtha used in electricity generation without considering Rule 57C(1)(ii), needed to be set aside. Consequently, the matter was remanded for the Tribunal to determine the eligibility for credit based on the specific rule.

3. Rule 57C(1) prohibits credit on inputs used for duty-exempt or nil-duty final products, with an exception for supplies to a 100% EOU. The Tribunal noted that the claim regarding the portion of electricity supplied to the EOU was not previously raised. Therefore, the original authority was instructed to verify this aspect and decide the matter afresh in line with the High Court's decision and Rule 57C(1)(ii). The appellants were granted a hearing opportunity before a new decision was issued, leading to the allowance of the appeal through remand for further verification and consideration.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates