2003 (9) TMI 275 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Disallowance of Modvat credit in respect of capital goods
- Imposition of penalty on the appellants

Analysis:
1. Disallowance of Modvat credit: The appellants, engaged in manufacturing parts of motor vehicles, appealed against an order disallowing Modvat credit of Rs. 25,26,192 on capital goods. The dispute arose when the appellants shifted certain capital goods to another factory premises without receiving them back. The Commissioner of Central Excise disallowed the credit and imposed a penalty. The appellants argued that the capital goods were transferred to their subsidiary company for manufacturing final products, hence justifying the credit. They contended that the Revenue was aware of the shifting and no suppression could be alleged. However, the Tribunal held that as per Rule 57U(6) of the Central Excise Rules, credit can only be taken if the capital goods are received in the factory premises under duty paying documents. Since the goods were not received back at the factory, the credit taken on 29-3-1999 was deemed inadmissible.

2. Penalty Imposition: The Tribunal reduced the penalty imposed on the appellants to Rs. 5 lakhs considering the circumstances of the case. Despite the reduction in penalty, the impugned order disallowing the Modvat credit was upheld. The Tribunal found no merit in the appellants' argument that the adjudication order was beyond the scope of the show cause notice. It was noted that the appellants had not followed the procedure under Rule 57S(1)(ii) of the Central Excise Rules for sending capital goods to job workers, further weakening their case. The Tribunal also dismissed the appellants' claim of no suppression, as they had availed credit without prior information to the Revenue.

In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi upheld the disallowance of Modvat credit on capital goods due to non-receipt of goods back at the factory premises. The penalty imposed on the appellants was reduced to Rs. 5 lakhs, considering the circumstances of the case. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of adhering to the provisions of the Central Excise Rules for availing credits and highlighted the consequences of not following the prescribed procedures.