2019 (7) TMI 557 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT Credit - cement returned back in the damage condition - period January, 2011 to August, 2014 - HELD THAT - The Deputy Chief Chemist has dealt with the damaged cement relating to some other company, and therefore, the report in relation to some other company cannot be applied on the facts of the appellant s case. Credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Admissibility of Cenvat Credit on damaged cement returned back.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against an order by the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the admissibility of Cenvat Credit on damaged cement returned between January 2011 to August 2014. The only issue to be decided was the eligibility of Cenvat Credit on such damaged cement. The Tribunal referred to a previous decision in the appellant's own case where it was held that the appellant is eligible for the benefit under Rule 96-ZV. The Deputy Chief Chemist's report mentioned that the damaged cement could be reprocessed by mixing with good cement and subjecting it to grinding, leading to the recovery of cent per cent by weight of the damaged cement. The Tribunal noted that the Deputy Chief Chemist's report related to another company and could not be applied to the appellant's case.

The Department had also relied on the Tribunal's previous decision for the period January 2016 to June 2017, where the same issue was decided in favor of the appellant. The Authorized Representative for the Revenue reiterated the findings in the impugned order, but the Tribunal, after reviewing both decisions, concluded that the report regarding damaged cement from another company could not be applied to the appellant's case. Therefore, following the Tribunal's previous decisions and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant with any consequential relief. The decision was dictated and pronounced in open court by the Member (Judicial) of the Tribunal.