2018 (6) TMI 1537 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT Credit - input/input services/capital goods not fully utilized in the manufacture of the final product and some quantity of the generated electricity is wheeled out from the factory - Held that - It is an admitted fact that the electricity generated by using the input and input services were not captively consumed for manufacture of the final product in entirety. Since some portion of generated electricity has been sold by the appellant to the grid on receipt of consideration, Cenvat credit attributable (proportionate) to the electricity wheeled out from the factory will not be available for the Cenvat benefit. Since the quantum of generation of electricity and actual use within the factory captively have not been discussed in the adjudication order and no documents were produced by the appellant to that effect, the matter should go back to the original authority for ascertaining such aspect - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
1. Availment of Cenvat credit on surplus electricity generated and wheeled out from the factory.
2. Application of Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 in the case.
3. Admissibility of Cenvat credit on electricity not entirely used within the factory premises.

Analysis:
1. The appellant, engaged in manufacturing sponge iron, generated surplus electricity within the factory for captive use and wheeled out the excess to the grid on payment. The Department objected to the availment of full Cenvat credit due to the surplus electricity generation. The Tribunal noted that electricity, though classified as excisable goods, was not exempted or nil-rated under the Central Excise Tariff Act. As per Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, the manufacturer must follow conditions when engaged in manufacturing both dutiable and exempted final products. Since electricity did not fall under either category, the Rule's embargo did not apply to the electricity wheeled out. However, as the generated electricity was not entirely used for captive production, the Cenvat credit attributable to the wheeled-out electricity was deemed unavailable for benefit. The Tribunal remanded the case to ascertain the quantum of electricity wheeled out for proper adjustment of Cenvat credit.

2. The Tribunal observed that the appellant had not fully utilized the generated electricity within the factory for manufacturing the final product, leading to the need for a proportionate reversal of Cenvat credit. The appellant acknowledged the partial wheeled-out electricity and agreed to the need for further assessment by the original authority. As the adjudication order lacked details on the actual electricity generation and usage within the factory, the matter required clarification through additional documentation and discussion. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was remanded for determining the exact proportion of electricity wheeled out and adjusting the Cenvat credit accordingly.

3. In conclusion, the Tribunal directed the appellant to reverse the proportionate Cenvat credit related to the electricity not entirely used within the factory after considering any previously reversed or deposited amounts for the intended purpose. The penalties imposed were set aside, and the appeal was allowed under the specified terms, emphasizing the importance of accurate assessment and adjustment of Cenvat credit concerning surplus electricity generation and usage within the manufacturing facility.