9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (9) TMI 819 - HC - Central ExciseRefund of accumulated CENVAT credit - CESTAT committed an error in ignoring Notification No.5/2006-CE (NT) dated 14.3.2006 in allowing the claim - Held that - Considering the Circular No. 390/Misc./163/2010-JC dated 17.08.2011 no appeal shall be filed in the High Courts if the duty involved does not exceed ₹ 10 lakhs with or without penalty and interest. No other circular has been issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Excise & Customs, authorizing the Department to file appeal where the amount is less than ₹ 10 lacs. While it is true that the present appeal was filed and notice was issued prior to the circular dated 20.10.2010 where appeal shall be filed in the High Courts if the duty involved does not exceed ₹ 2 lakhs with or without penalty and interest. In that light, it is not being disputed that the issues involved and the questions formulated in this appeal need not be decided as the amount involved in the appeal is ₹ 60,774/-.
Issues Involved:
1. Interpretation of Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, and the definition of "input service". 2. Applicability of Notification No. 5/2006-CE (NT) dated 14.3.2006 regarding refund of CENVAT credit for input services used in the manufacture of final products cleared for export. 3. Applicability of monetary limits for filing appeals as per circulars issued by the Central Board of Excise & Customs. Detailed Analysis: 1. Interpretation of Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004: The core issue was whether the CESTAT correctly interpreted Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, in conjunction with Sub-Rule 2(1) concerning the definition of "input service". The Tribunal treated various maintenance services as services "used in manufacture," which was contested by the Revenue. The Revenue's appeal questioned if CESTAT had erred in this interpretation. 2. Applicability of Notification No. 5/2006-CE (NT) dated 14.3.2006: The second issue was whether the CESTAT ignored Notification No. 5/2006-CE (NT) dated 14.3.2006, which stipulates that the refund of CENVAT credit is allowed only for input or input services used in the manufacture of final products cleared for export. The Revenue argued that the Tribunal had committed an error by not considering this notification. 3. Applicability of Monetary Limits for Filing Appeals: The appeal was also influenced by two circulars issued by the Central Excise Department, dated 20.10.2010 and 17.08.2011, which set monetary limits for filing appeals before the High Court. According to these circulars, the Department would not file appeals if the duty and penalty involved were below Rs. 2 lacs, later revised to Rs. 10 lacs. The amount involved in the present appeal was Rs. 60,774/-, which was below the prescribed limit. Court's Consideration and Judgment: Monetary Limits and Circulars: The court noted the monetary limits prescribed by the circulars and emphasized the National Litigation Policy aimed at reducing government litigation. The circulars explicitly stated that appeals should not be filed if the amount involved is below the specified threshold, except in cases involving constitutional validity, illegal notifications, or accepted audit objections. The court extracted and reproduced the relevant portions of the circulars to highlight the instructions and monetary limits for filing appeals. It was noted that the appeal in question fell below the monetary limit of Rs. 10 lacs, making it unnecessary to consider the merits of the appeal. Binding Nature of Circulars: The court emphasized that the Department is bound by its own circulars and instructions. Despite the appeal being filed before the issuance of the circular dated 20.10.2010, the court held that the circular's contents and prescribed limits applied when the appeal came up for consideration. Conclusion: Given the monetary limit and the binding nature of the circulars, the court decided not to delve into the merits of the appeal. The formulated questions remained open to be decided in an appropriate case. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed without expressing any opinion on the merits, solely based on the monetary limits prescribed by the circulars. Summary: The Gujarat High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal concerning the refund of Rs. 60,774/- of accumulated CENVAT credit claimed by the respondent under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The dismissal was based on the monetary limits set by the Central Excise Department's circulars, which aimed to reduce government litigation by not filing appeals for amounts below Rs. 10 lacs. The court did not address the merits of the appeal, leaving the formulated questions open for future consideration.
|
