2012 (11) TMI 778 - AT - Central Excise

Re-credit entries in Cenvat Credit account - Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal as original adjudicating authority has not considered the said issue - Held that - If the appellant is not contesting the confirmation of demand, consequent readjustment in Cenvat credit flows out of the same & if the original adjudicating authority inspite of appellants having made a request has not considered the said plea, and has not passed any orders on the same, the Commissioner (Appeals) should have considered and passed the orders instead of rejecting the appeal. As appellants have paid back the rebate amount they are entitled to make re-credit entries in their Cenvat Credit account - in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appellant engaged in the manufacture of Homatropine Methyl Bromide (HMB) and exported the product, claiming rebate.
2. Proceedings initiated against the appellant for paying duty on HMB, which was exempted from duty payment.
3. Appellants requested re-credit of duty paid in Cenvat credit account, which was not addressed by the original adjudicating authority.
4. Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal, stating the re-credit issue was not related to the impugned order.

Analysis:
Issue 1:
The Appellate Tribunal noted that the appellant was involved in the manufacture of HMB and had exported the product, paying duty out of their Cenvat credit account and claiming rebate. The authorities initiated proceedings against the appellant, alleging that duty should not have been paid on the exempted HMB, leading to a dispute over the rebate claim.

Issue 2:
The Tribunal observed that the appellant had agreed to the proceedings, paid back the rebate claim, and requested re-credit of the duty already paid in the Cenvat credit account. However, the original adjudicating authority did not address the re-credit request, leading to a lack of final orders on this crucial issue.

Issue 3:
Upon appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) refused to pass any order regarding the re-credit issue, stating it was not related to the impugned order. The Tribunal disagreed with this reasoning, emphasizing the close link between the confirmation of demand and the consequent re-adjustment in Cenvat credit. The failure of the original adjudicating authority to consider the re-credit plea reflected a casual attitude that needed correction at the appellate stage.

Issue 4:
In light of the appellant's repayment of the rebate amount, the Tribunal concluded that they were entitled to make re-credit entries in their Cenvat Credit account. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, providing the appellants with the necessary relief they sought. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of addressing all issues raised before the adjudicating authority to ensure a fair and thorough resolution of disputes.