2016 (12) TMI 322 - AT - Central Excise

Benefit under two notifications - N/N. 29/04-CE dated 09.07.2004 - N/N. 30/2004 - whether the assessee is eligible for exemption under Notification 30/04-CE in its specific reference to the condition of non-availment of input credit stipulated in the Notification? - Held that - the Original Authority had recorded that though the clarification issued by the Boards Circular is clear the appellant reversed the credit after utilization and that too under protest. He held that such reversal is in violation of Boards Circular and findings of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Bombay Dyeing Ltd. 2007 (8) TMI 2 - Supreme Court . The Original authority declined to consider the fact that reversal of credit in the present case will satisfy the condition of the Notification. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Availing benefit under multiple notifications simultaneously.
2. Reversal of credit under Notification No. 30/2004.
3. Eligibility for exemption under Notification 30/04-CE.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Availing benefit under multiple notifications simultaneously
The appellants were engaged in the manufacture of Textile, Textile articles and were availing concession under Notification No. 29/04-CE to discharge duty on final products. They were also availing cenvat credit on various inputs. A dispute arose when they opted to adopt a procedure prescribed by a Board Circular dated 01.02.2007, leading to confusion regarding availing benefits under both Notifications simultaneously.

Issue 2: Reversal of credit under Notification No. 30/2004
The appellants reversed an amount of ?9,80,549/- on 31.08.2008, attributable to inputs lying in stock as of 31.01.2007, to comply with the condition of non-availment of cenvat credit under Notification No. 30/2004. However, proceedings were initiated against them for allegedly violating this condition, resulting in confirmation of Central Excise duty payment of ?3,56,99,537/- along with a penalty.

Issue 3: Eligibility for exemption under Notification 30/04-CE
The appellant's eligibility for exemption under Notification 30/04-CE hinged on the condition of non-availment of input credit stipulated in the Notification. The appellate tribunal considered whether the reversal of credit made by the appellant subsequently, even under protest, satisfied the condition of the Notification. The tribunal analyzed judicial pronouncements, including decisions by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and High Courts, to determine the impact of such reversals on eligibility for the exemption.

The tribunal noted that the Original Authority had held the reversal of credit as a violation of the Board's Circular and previous judicial findings. However, after examining relevant case laws, including decisions by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and High Courts, the tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument that the reversal of credit should be sufficient to avail the benefit of Notification No. 30/2004. Relying on precedents, the tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, concluding that the appellant was eligible for the exemption under Notification 30/04-CE.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the complexities surrounding the availing of benefits under different notifications, the significance of reversing credit to comply with conditions, and the legal considerations for eligibility for exemptions under specific notifications.