2006 (11) TMI 105 - HC - Central Excise

Credit Duty paid by assessee at the higher rate of 24% instead of 16% - No dispute raised by Revenue at the supplier (of inputs) end When the duty was paid by the Supplier at the rate of 24% and added in the cost which has been paid by assessee (purchaser) Credit is allowable

Summary

Issues: Entitlement to CENVAT credit at a higher rate paid on inputs

Analysis:
The main issue in this case revolves around the entitlement of the respondent to claim CENVAT credit at a higher rate paid on inputs by the manufacturer. The Tribunal considered the contention that the supplier had paid duty at a rate of 24% instead of 16%, which led to a dispute regarding the extent of CENVAT credit that could be availed by the respondent. The Tribunal emphasized that the duty paid by the manufacturer is eligible to be availed as Modvat credit at the receiver's end. It was noted that the Central Excise authorities could not dispute the duty liability of the inputs supplier and restrict the credit based on the duty rate paid by the manufacturer. The Commissioner (Appeals) relied on a previous decision of the Tribunal to support the view that the respondent was entitled to claim the higher rate of duty paid by the supplier for CENVAT credit. Consequently, the appeals filed by the revenue were rejected.

Conclusion:
The judgment concluded that when the duty was paid by the supplier at a rate of 24% and added to the cost borne by the assessee, there was no flaw in the Tribunal's decision to allow that portion of duty for the purpose of CENVAT credit. As a result, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the Tribunal's ruling in favor of the respondent's entitlement to claim CENVAT credit at the higher rate paid on inputs.