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 - 2013 (4) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2013 (4) TMI 330 - AT - Central Excise


Issues:
- Eligibility to avail cenvat credit on Sugar Cess under the provisions of Sugar Cess Act, 1982.

Analysis:
The case involved appeals against an order concerning the eligibility of a manufacturer to avail cenvat credit on the Sugar Cess paid under the Sugar Cess Act, 1982. The appellant, a 100% EOU engaged in biscuit and confectionery manufacturing, opted out of the EOU scheme and filed refund claims under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The appellant's exports were either under Bond or Letter of Undertaking, leading to an accumulation of cenvat credit. The appellant procured raw materials from dealers and availed cenvat credit on duty paid. However, the appellant's refund claim was partially rejected due to availing credit on the Sugar Cess, which was not admissible. The first appellate authority upheld the rejection, leading to the present appeal.

Upon examination, the Tribunal found that Rule 3 of the Cenvat Credit Rules did not include the Sugar Cess as a credit that could be availed by a manufacturer. Referring to a previous order concerning the same appellant on the identical issue, the Tribunal noted the rejection of the appeal in that case. The argument raised regarding the Education Cess collected on the Sugar Cess was dismissed as irrelevant to the denial of cenvat credit issue at hand. Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the appeals lacked merit and rejected them.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision was based on the specific provisions of the Cenvat Credit Rules, which did not allow for the availing of cenvat credit on the Sugar Cess paid under the Sugar Cess Act, 1982. The rejection of the appeals was supported by previous decisions and a clear interpretation of the relevant rules, highlighting the importance of adherence to statutory provisions in claiming credits.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates