Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2008 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (11) TMI 246 - AT - Central ExciseThe issue involved in this matter is reversal of Cenvat credit in respect of the cigarettes unfit for human consumption which were allowed to be destroyed. - appellants have invited the attention of the Bench to the Board s Circular dated 7-8-2002 which deals the admissibility of Modvat/Cenvat credit on inputs used in the manufacture of finished goods on which duty has been remitted - It is further seen that the Commissioner himself has noted that the appellants did not claim any insurance. Appeal allowed reversal of credit not warranted
Issues: Reversal of Cenvat credit for destroyed cigarettes.
In this case, the appellants, who are manufacturers of cigarettes, filed appeals against Orders-in-Original passed by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Hyderabad, regarding the reversal of Cenvat credit for cigarettes unfit for human consumption that were allowed to be destroyed. The Commissioner had mandated the reversal of Cenvat credit on the inputs used in manufacturing the destroyed cigarettes. The appellants contested this decision, arguing that as per the Board's Circular dated 7-8-2002, there was no requirement for reversal of credit in such cases. They also referred to a previous decision by the Tribunal in their favor, where it was held that credit on destroyed goods with remitted duty is admissible. The Tribunal's decision had not been challenged by the Revenue, and the Commissioner himself noted that the appellants did not claim any insurance for the destroyed goods. Therefore, the Board's Circular of 2004, cited by the Revenue, may not be applicable in this scenario. The Tribunal, considering the arguments and precedents, allowed the appeals with consequential relief, if any, in favor of the appellants. The judgment was pronounced and dictated in the open court by Shri T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T) of the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Bangalore.
|