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 - 2012 (11) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2012 (11) TMI 196 - AT - Central Excise


Issues:
1. Disallowance of cenvat credit on an empty chlorine cylinder.
2. Consideration of eligibility for cenvat credit based on the actual use of the cylinder.
3. Applicability of penalty under Section 11AC for availing cenvat credit.

Issue 1: Disallowance of cenvat credit on an empty chlorine cylinder:
The judgment involves a dispute regarding the disallowance of cenvat credit on an empty chlorine cylinder. The appellant argued that the cylinder was not only used for transportation but also as a storage tank within the factory, making it an essential accessory for production. The appellant relied on precedents where similar items were considered eligible for cenvat credit. However, the authorities contended that the cylinder was used solely for transportation based on the show cause notice. The remand order directed a reevaluation of whether the cylinder served a dual function as a storage tank and for transportation. The lower authorities focused on the date of receipt of the cylinders and did not consider the actual utilization aspect. The appellant's submission regarding the dual function of the cylinder was supported by relevant case law, indicating that credit should be admissible. The judgment highlighted the need to assess the actual use of the cylinder to determine eligibility for cenvat credit.

Issue 2: Consideration of eligibility for cenvat credit based on the actual use of the cylinder:
The judgment emphasized the importance of evaluating the actual use of the empty chlorine cylinder to determine the eligibility for cenvat credit. The remand order explicitly directed the lower authorities to verify whether the cylinder was used exclusively for transportation or if it served a dual purpose as a storage tank and for transportation. The appellant's argument that the cylinder was connected to machines in the factory and used for both transportation and storage was supported by relevant case law examples. The authorities, however, focused solely on the date of receipt of the cylinders and did not adequately consider the dual function aspect. The judgment underscored the necessity of assessing how the cylinder was utilized within the factory to ascertain the admissibility of cenvat credit.

Issue 3: Applicability of penalty under Section 11AC for availing cenvat credit:
Regarding the liability for penalty under Section 11AC for availing cenvat credit on specific items, the appellant admitted liability for two items and did not contest it. The total cenvat credit amount involved was specified. Considering the circumstances, including the appellant's compliance with duty payment and lack of dispute on the liability, the judgment concluded that no penalty should be imposed. The decision was based on factors such as the size of the appellant, the nature of items involved, and the appellant's payment of duty and interest without contest. The judgment invoked Section 11A(2B) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, to justify the non-imposition of a penalty in this case.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues surrounding the disallowance of cenvat credit on an empty chlorine cylinder, the importance of considering the actual use of the cylinder for eligibility assessment, and the decision on penalty under Section 11AC for availing cenvat credit.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates