2016 (11) TMI 634 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT credit - Rule 4(3) of the Customs (IGCRDMEG) Rules 1996 - concessional rate of duty - Held that - Once the proper use of the goods in the specified final products have not been disputed by the Department, the exemption availed on the imported goods cannot be denied - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Contravention of Customs Rules regarding the use of imported goods.
2. Dispute over diversion of goods to another unit due to closure of the manufacturing unit.
3. Challenge to the adjudication order by the respondent.
4. Decision based on earlier case law and tribunal rulings.

Analysis:
1. The case involves the contravention of Customs Rules by the respondent, who imported goods at a concessional rate of duty for manufacturing colored picture tubes. The respondent cleared various inputs without using them in their factory premises as required by the rules. This led to a show cause notice being issued, and subsequently, a demand for duty along with penalties was imposed. The Ld. Commissioner (A) set aside the adjudication order, leading to an appeal by the Revenue.

2. The Ld. Commissioner (A) noted the appellant's contention that due to the closure of their Mohali unit, they diverted the goods to their Vadodra unit for manufacturing color picture tubes. The appellant provided proper intimation to the department about this diversion. The Ld. Commissioner (A) found this contention convincing as the goods were used for the same purpose, i.e., in the manufacture of color picture tubes. Since the proper use of the goods in the specified final products was not disputed, the exemption availed on the imported goods could not be denied.

3. The Ld. Commissioner (A) relied on the decision in the respondent's own earlier case for the same issue, where the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal. This decision was further affirmed by the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana. Based on this precedent, the Ld. Commissioner (A) upheld the respondent's position, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHANDIGARH.

4. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the impugned order based on the earlier decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the respondent's own case. The Tribunal upheld the Ld. Commissioner (A)'s decision, citing consistency with the earlier ruling. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed.