2018 (10) TMI 639 - HC - Central Excise

Demand of duty of Credit, interest and penalty - issue pending reconsideration before the Larger Bench - input credit on Fuel - job-work - penalty - Held that - The issue involved in the present Tax Appeal is squarely covered by the judgment of Supreme Court in case of Commissioner of C. Ex. v. Gujarat Narmada Fertilizers Co. Ltd. 2009 (8) TMI 15 - SUPREME COURT , where it was held that exclusion of fuel- input vis-a-vis non-fuel-input would still fall in sub-rule (1) - appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Dismissal of appeal against the judgment of CESTAT.
2. Admissibility of credit of input duty on fuel for exempted final product.
3. Justification of penalty recovery pending consideration in various courts.
4. Failure to discuss the legal position of credit availed on fuel for goods cleared under job work.
5. Dismissal of appeal without discussing relevant case laws.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner appealed against the CESTAT judgment, raising several questions for consideration. The court noted that the issues raised were already covered by a Supreme Court judgment in the case of Commissioner of C. Ex. v. Gujarat Narmada Fertilizers Co. Ltd. The court held that the appeal should be dismissed without further discussion, despite the petitioner's argument that the Supreme Court decision was referred to a larger bench. The court referred to another case, Maruti Suzuki Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, DelhiIII, where a similar view was expressed by the Supreme Court.

2. The court emphasized that a mere reference to a larger bench does not diminish the authority of the Supreme Court judgment. This position was supported by a Division Bench of the court in a previous case involving Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Co. Ltd. The court ultimately dismissed the Tax Appeal along with the Civil Application.

3. The court did not find it necessary to delve into the specific legal position regarding the credit availed on fuel for goods cleared under job work. The dismissal of the appeal was based on the clear applicability of the Supreme Court judgment to the issues raised by the petitioner.

4. The court's decision to dismiss the appeal without discussing various case laws on the subject was justified by the direct relevance of the Supreme Court judgment to the issues presented. The court's focus was on the applicability of existing legal precedent rather than engaging in a detailed analysis of additional case laws.

5. Overall, the judgment reflects a strict adherence to established legal principles and precedent, leading to the dismissal of the appeal based on the clear coverage of the issues by a previous Supreme Court decision. The court's decision underscores the importance of consistency and respect for authoritative legal interpretations in resolving tax disputes.