2014 (4) TMI 454 - AT - Central Excise

Reversal of CENVAT Credit at the rate of 8% of their value of exempted final product - Rule 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules - No separate accounts were maintained by the appellant in respect of the raw material used for dutiable as also exempted goods - appellant had taken a stand that in as much as the entire input credit involved on dutiable as well as exempted goods stand reversed by them, there is no justification for confirmation of demand in terms of Rule 6 - Held that - Reversal of cenvat credit figures have been verified and found to be correct. The said letter also accepts the payment of interest by the assessee. Verification report of the jurisdictional Range officer also stands enclosed. The said letter accepts the application in terms of the amended Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - In as much as the applicant has reversed the entire credit along with interest, as is very clear from the letter of Commissioner, demand set aside - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Confirmation of demand under Rule 6(3)B of Cenvat Credit Rules for failure to maintain separate accounts for raw materials used in dutiable and exempted goods; Interpretation of Rule 6 in relation to reversal of input credit; Application of amended Rule 6 during 2010-2011; Commissioner's acceptance of application for reversal of credit under amended Rule 6; Verification of reversed credit figures and payment of interest; Setting aside of demand confirmation and allowance of appeal.

Analysis:
The judgment addresses the issue of demand confirmation against the appellant under Rule 6(3)B of Cenvat Credit Rules due to the absence of separate accounts for raw materials used in dutiable and exempted goods. The appellant argued that the reversal of entire input credit on both types of goods should negate the demand under Rule 6. However, the Commissioner upheld the demand, leading to the present appeal.

During the proceedings, the appellant claimed that the law was amended in 2010-2011, making the reversal of credit sufficient to avoid Rule 6 implications. The appellant submitted an application to the Commissioner in this regard, supported by correspondence with the Department. The Commissioner's letter acknowledged the application, verified the reversed credit figures, confirmed the payment of interest by the appellant, and accepted the application under the amended Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules.

The Tribunal noted that the reversal of entire credit along with interest, as verified by the Commissioner, aligned with the requirements of the amended Rule 6. Consequently, the impugned order confirming the demand was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, providing consequential relief to the appellants. The judgment emphasizes the importance of compliance with Rule 6 and the impact of amendments on the interpretation and application of such rules in Cenvat Credit cases.