2006 (10) TMI 93 - HC - Central Excise

Common inputs clearance of paper on payment of duty as well as under Not. 3/01 since asessee is reversing credit in respect of inputs used in exempted goods then reversal of credit is respect of inputs lying in stock is not required no substantial question of law arise

Summary

Issues:
Whether the manufacturer was required to reverse the Cenvat Credit in respect of inputs used in goods wholly exempted from payment of duty under a specific notification.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed by the revenue challenging an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. The main question raised was whether the manufacturer needed to reverse the Cenvat Credit for inputs in stock or used in semi-finished/finished goods under a notification exempting certain goods from duty. The assessee was involved in manufacturing various types of papers and had opted for availing benefits under a specific notification for certain types of papers. The revenue contended that the manufacturer was obligated to pay duty on goods covered by the notification equal to the credit allowed for inputs when the option was exercised. However, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that since the manufacturer was producing various types of papers and reversing the credit for inputs used in papers under the notification, the reversal of credit for all inputs was unnecessary.

The revenue argued that as the inputs were used in exempted goods, the manufacturer could not avail the benefit of Modvat credit for inputs in stock. On the other hand, the counsel for the assessee pointed out that the assessee had already reversed the credit for inputs, as acknowledged by the Tribunal in its order. The Tribunal's observations highlighted that the manufacturer was producing papers not covered by the notification and was clearing them by paying duty, using common inputs for all types of papers. Therefore, the reversal of credit for inputs in stock and final products was deemed unnecessary. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument and set aside the demand, stating that the appeal was allowed.

The High Court noted the factual position presented by the Tribunal, confirming that the assessee was indeed reversing the Modvat credit for inputs used in manufacturing paper under the specific notification. Consequently, the court concluded that the question raised did not qualify as a substantial question of law. Therefore, the appeal by the revenue was dismissed based on the established facts and the Tribunal's decision regarding the reversal of Modvat credit by the assessee for inputs used in manufacturing paper under the said notification.