2007 (4) TMI 135 - AT - Central Excise

Cenvat/Modvat - Revenue contended that appellant instead of availing admissible exemption on the intermediate product utilised for manufacture of final product, paid duty on the same and availed credit of such - Held that revenue contention was not sustained and credit allowed

Summary

Issues:
Revenue's grievance regarding exemption of excise duty on manufactured goods.

Analysis:
The Revenue's appeal was based on the contention that the respondent paid duty on goods instead of availing exemption under Notification No. 67/95-C.E. The Revenue argued that the notification, issued under Section 5A of the Central Excise Act, mandated compliance, and failure to do so was rightly addressed by the Adjudicating Authority. The Revenue also mentioned a pending matter related to this issue before the High Court.

The respondent, represented by Senior Counsel, argued that paying excise duty on the goods and availing credit against the final product's duty liability did not prejudice the Revenue. It was contended that the notification did not mandate strict compliance without providing any choice or option. The respondent relied on a Tribunal decision and argued that the duty paid on inputs for the final product resulted in a revenue-neutral situation. References to relevant case laws were made to support this argument.

Upon hearing both sides and examining the records, the Tribunal noted that there was no demonstration of prejudice to the Revenue due to the respondent's actions. It was highlighted that the case had a revenue-neutral effect, as the duty paid on inputs was utilized as credit against the final product's duty liability. The Tribunal also noted the absence of evidence regarding undervaluation of goods, which could have prejudiced the Revenue. As a result, the Tribunal upheld the First Appellate Order, ruling in favor of the respondent and dismissing the Revenue's appeal.