2018 (3) TMI 181 - AT - Central Excise

Revenue neutrality - irregular availment of CENVAT credit - Held that - the issue of Neutrality was not discussed in the orders of the lower authority. The issue of Revenue Neutrality is based on the proper examination of the facts of each case - the matter is remanded to the Adjudicating Authority to decide afresh after considering the submission of the appellant and to pass order in accordance with law - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
1. Availment of CENVAT Credit on inputs sent to job worker without reversal.
2. Allegation of irregular CENVAT Credit availed on finished products.
3. Recovery of CENVAT Credit, interest, and penalty under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and Central Excise Rules, 1944.
4. Appeal against the Adjudicating Authority's decision confirming the demand.

Issue 1: Availment of CENVAT Credit on inputs sent to job worker without reversal

The appellant, engaged in manufacturing Electrical Meters, sent inputs to a job worker under Rule 4(5)(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 without reversing the Cenvat Credit. The job worker returned the goods within 180 days, but the Revenue alleged irregular Cenvat Credit availment on finished products. The Adjudicating Authority confirmed a demand of ?17,32,534/- along with interest and penalty. The appellant contended that it was a case of Revenue Neutrality, citing relevant case laws. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a re-examination by the lower authority on the issue of Revenue Neutrality and other raised concerns.

Issue 2: Allegation of irregular CENVAT Credit on finished products

The Show Cause Notice accused the appellant of availing CENVAT Credit on finished new base assembly and other products without reversing the credit, leading to the demand confirmation by the Adjudicating Authority. The appellant argued for Revenue Neutrality, highlighting the absence of loss to the Department in similar cases. The Tribunal referenced a decision emphasizing that the job worker's duty payment on processed goods did not negate the appellant's entitlement to CENVAT Credit, urging a fresh examination of the facts by the lower authority.

Issue 3: Recovery of CENVAT Credit, interest, and penalty

The Show Cause Notice proposed recovering the CENVAT Credit along with interest and imposing a penalty under Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Adjudicating Authority upheld this demand, leading to the appeal before the Tribunal. The appellant argued on merit and limitation, relying on relevant legal decisions to support their case. The Tribunal remanded the matter to the Adjudicating Authority for a fresh decision considering the appellant's submissions and legal precedents.

Issue 4: Appeal against the Adjudicating Authority's decision

The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appellant's appeal, prompting the present appeal before the Tribunal. Both sides presented their arguments, with the appellant emphasizing Revenue Neutrality and the need for a re-examination of the case. After hearing the arguments and examining the records, the Tribunal allowed the appeal by way of remand, directing the Adjudicating Authority to decide afresh in accordance with the law.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues, arguments presented, legal references cited, and the Tribunal's decision to remand the matter for a fresh examination by the Adjudicating Authority.