2013 (3) TMI 527 - AT - Central Excise

Cenvat credit on common input services used in the manufacture of dutiable and exempted goods without maintaining separate accounts/inventory - Held that - Superintendent (AR) who has fairly acknowledged the change of law which granted the benefit to eligible persons with retrospective effect subject to compliance with the relevant procedural requirements. Thus after giving careful consideration to the submissions it is a fit case for requesting the Commissioner to consider the appellant s applications dated 9-7-2010 on merits, taking into account sub-rule (7) of Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 73 of the Finance Act, 2010 giving the appellant a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal for demand for the period from 1-3-2005 to 31-10-2007.
2. Appeal for demand for the period from 1-11-2007 to 30-9-2008.

Analysis:
1. The appellant challenged demands and penalties under Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 for availing credit on common input services without separate accounts for dutiable and exempted goods. The appellant cited the beneficial amendment under the Finance Act, 2010, introducing sub-rule (7) to claim exemption with retrospective effect for disputes from September 10, 2004, to March 31, 2008. The procedure for claiming this benefit was outlined in Section 73(2) of the Finance Act, 2010. The appellant's applications to the Commissioner were not entertained post-adjudication, leading to a request for remand to consider the applications.

2. The Tribunal acknowledged the change in law granting retrospective benefits subject to procedural compliance. Considering the submissions, the Tribunal found it appropriate to request the Commissioner to review the appellant's applications dated 9-7-2010 in light of sub-rule (7) of Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, and Section 73 of the Finance Act, 2010. The Tribunal emphasized the need for the Commissioner to provide a reasonable opportunity for the appellant to be heard. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, and the appeals were allowed by way of remand for the Commissioner's reconsideration, ensuring justice is served. The miscellaneous applications were also disposed of accordingly.