2012 (12) TMI 852 - AT - Central Excise

Non maintenance of separate accounts of the inputs used in manufacture of dutiable as well as exempted goods - Waiver of pre-deposit of duty, interest and penalty - Held that - Applicants are required to reverse the proportionate credit in respect of the inputs/input services used in manufacture of exempted goods as they are not maintaining separate records in respect of the inputs used in manufacture of dutiable as well as exempted goods - directed to deposit Rs.15 lakhs within a period of eight weeks and report Compliance on 13.09.2012.

Summary

Issues:
1. Waiver of pre-deposit of duty, interest, and penalty.
2. Demand of duty due to manufacturing and clearance of both dutiable and exempted goods.
3. Requirement to reverse credit proportionate to inputs used in manufacturing exempted goods.
4. Allegation of availing credit on common input services without maintaining separate records.

Analysis:
The case involved an application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty, interest, and penalty amounting to Rs.1,65,11,288/- by the applicant. The Revenue claimed that duty was due as the applicant had manufactured and cleared both dutiable and exempted goods without maintaining separate accounts for the inputs used. The Revenue relied on Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 to support their demand. It was noted that the applicants did not respond to the show-cause notice or appear for the personal hearing, which impacted the proceedings.

The applicant contended that a retrospective amendment of Rule 6 required the manufacturer to reverse credit proportionate to inputs used in manufacturing exempted goods, amounting to approximately Rs.7 lakhs. The Revenue, however, argued that the applicants also availed credit on common input services without maintaining separate records, justifying the demand made. The Tribunal considered the retrospective amendment of Rule 6 and directed the applicants to deposit Rs.15 lakhs within eight weeks. Upon this deposit, the pre-deposit of the remaining amount was waived, and the recovery was stayed during the appeal's pendency.

In conclusion, the judgment highlighted the importance of complying with the provisions of the Cenvat Credit Rules, especially regarding maintaining separate records for inputs used in manufacturing dutiable and exempted goods. The Tribunal's decision to require the reversal of proportionate credit and the directive for deposit and waiver of pre-deposit reflected a balanced approach considering the facts and circumstances of the case. The need for timely compliance and reporting was emphasized to ensure the proper resolution of the appeal.