2018 (4) TMI 924 - AT - Customs

Exemption from CVD - N/N. 30/2004-CE dated 9.7.2004 - whether the goods imported by the appellant is exempted from payment of CVD by applying the excise exemption N/N. 30/2004-CE dated 9.7.2004? - Held that - In the said notification, condition was provided that the manufacturer should not avail the CENVAT Credit on the inputs or capital goods used for manufacture of goods on which the exemption is claimed - In the facts of the present case, the goods are imported, hence the condition of non-availment of CENVAT Credit on inputs and capital goods does not get fulfilled. Benefit cannot be allowed - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues involved:
Whether the appellant is entitled to the exemption under Notification No. 30/2004-CE dated 9.7.2004 for goods imported for the purpose of exemption from CVD.

Detailed Analysis:

1. The issue in the present case revolves around the appellant's eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 30/2004-CE dated 9.7.2004, which provides an exemption from excise duty subject to the condition of non-availment of CENVAT Credit on inputs or capital goods. Additionally, the question arises whether this exemption can be applied to goods imported for the purpose of exemption from CVD.

2. Despite notice, no appearance was made on behalf of the appellant during the proceedings.

3. The Assistant Commissioner representing the Revenue pointed out that a similar issue had been decided in the appellant's own case by the Hon'ble Madras High Court, as reported in 2016 (338) ELT 44 (Mad.). Therefore, the issue is no longer res integra, meaning it has been conclusively settled.

4. Upon reviewing the submissions and records, the Tribunal found that the crucial issue at hand is whether the goods imported by the appellant qualify for exemption from CVD under Notification No. 30/2004-CE dated 9.7.2004. The notification specifies a condition that the manufacturer must not avail CENVAT Credit on inputs or capital goods used for manufacturing the goods for which the exemption is sought. Since the goods in question were imported, the condition of non-availment of CENVAT Credit on inputs and capital goods is not met. Referring to the previous judgment in the appellant's case, where a similar issue was decided in favor of the Revenue, the Tribunal concluded that the issue is no longer res integra.

5. Consequently, based on the precedent set by the Hon'ble Madras High Court, the Tribunal upheld the impugned order and dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant.

This comprehensive analysis highlights the core legal issues, the arguments presented, the relevant legal provisions, and the Tribunal's decision based on established precedents.