2018 (5) TMI 93 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT credit - common input services in the manufacture and supply of oxygen gas for medical purposes - non-maintenance of separate records - Rule 6(3) of CCR 2004 - Held that - though there was a categorical submission on behalf of the appellant that they are not using any inputs/ input services in the manufacture and supply of oxygen gas for medical purposes, the demand has been confirmed observing that inputs/ input services were used in the manufacture of oxygen exempted from duty being supplied for medical purposes. To ascertain the facts, whether the appellant had used any inputs/ input services in the manufacture of oxygen supplied for medical purposes, the matter needs to be remanded to the adjudicating authority - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against order-in-appeal passed by Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Vadodara regarding credit availed on common inputs for dutiable and exempted products.
- Allegation of not maintaining separate records for consumption of inputs used in the manufacture of dutiable and exempted products.
- Demand notice for recovery of duty on exempted product.
- Appeal filed before Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) rejected.
- Contention regarding credit availed on input service for oxygen used for medical purposes.
- Dispute over whether input services were used only for providing industrial gases and not for medical purposes.
- Need for remand to ascertain facts regarding the use of inputs in the manufacture of oxygen supplied for medical purposes.

Analysis:
The case involves an appeal against an order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Vadodara, concerning the appellant's failure to maintain separate records for the consumption of inputs used in the manufacture of dutiable and exempted products. The appellant, engaged in the manufacture of various gases, including oxygen for medical purposes, faced a demand notice for recovery of duty on the exempted product due to alleged non-maintenance of separate records. The appellant contended that the credit availed on input services for oxygen used for medical purposes was not in violation of the law as the oxygen was cleared only to one buyer for medical use. However, the Revenue argued that it was unclear whether the input services were used solely for industrial gases or also for medical purposes, necessitating a remand for further investigation.

The Tribunal noted the conflicting submissions and observed that while the appellant claimed not to use any inputs or input services in the manufacture of oxygen for medical purposes, the demand was confirmed based on the assumption that inputs were indeed used for the exempted oxygen. To clarify the factual situation and determine whether inputs were utilized in the production of oxygen supplied for medical purposes, the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed by way of remand for a detailed examination of the usage of inputs in the manufacture of oxygen intended for medical use.