Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2024 (6) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2024 (6) TMI 1005 - AT - Central Excise


Issues:
Determining compliance with Notification No.22/2003-CE dated 31.03.2003 regarding demand of duty on furnace oil allegedly not used in electricity generation.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Facts of the Case:
- The appellant, a 100% EOU engaged in cotton yarn manufacture, faced a demand for excise duty on shortfall of electricity generation due to alleged furnace oil consumption based on Input-Output Norms.
- The demand was confirmed with interest and penalty, upheld by Commissioner(Appeals), leading to the present appeal.

2. Appellant's Contentions:
- Appellant had necessary permissions for captive power plant and DTA power transfer, complying with Input-Output norms for duty payment on DTA supply.
- Argued compliance with NFE criteria and export obligations, reversing/paying duty on DTA supply as per approved norms.
- Cited Gujarat High Court and Madras High Court judgments emphasizing input-output norms as indicators, not sole grounds for duty demands.

3. Revenue's Stand:
- Revenue supported Commissioner(Appeals)'s findings without additional arguments.

4. Court's Analysis:
- Central issue: Whether demand of duty on unutilized furnace oil breaches Notification conditions.
- Notification No.22/2003-CE Condition No.7 allows surplus power sale/transfer with duty payment based on Input-Output norms.
- Appellant had permissions for power generation and transfer, following approved Input-Output norms for duty payment.
- Discrepancy in electricity generation vs. audit calculations challenged by appellant, citing compliance with NFE and export obligations.
- Court referenced Gujarat and Madras High Court judgments on excess wastage not warranting duty demand without diversion evidence.
- Absence of diversion and mere shortfall in electricity generation from furnace oil usage deemed insufficient for duty demand.
- Order set aside demand, allowing appeal with any consequential relief as per law.

5. Conclusion:
- The Tribunal overturned the demand for duty on unutilized furnace oil, emphasizing compliance with Notification conditions and approved norms.
- Citing precedents, the Court ruled that mere deviation from input-output norms without diversion evidence does not justify duty imposition, leading to the appeal's success.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates