2015 (10) TMI 669 - HC - Central Excise

Denial of CENVAT Credit - Held that - Tribunal on fact found that in this case duty levied on the raw material has actually been paid. Once it is found on fact and it is not challenged on the ground of any perversity, the exemption is applicable automatically. The learned Tribunal has relied on the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-I v. CEGAT, Chennai - 2005 (1) TMI 125 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS and recorded that the facts in that case and the present case are identical and therefore, the said decision is applicable to the present case - No reason to interfere with impugned order - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Allowance of Cenvat credit on Ethanol, a non-excisable commodity under Rule 3 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.
2. Setting aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals-I), Hyderabad against the respondent for availing credit contrary to the provisions of Rule 3 read with Rule 9(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.

Analysis:
1. The first issue revolves around the correctness of allowing the respondent to avail Cenvat credit on Ethanol, a non-excisable commodity, under Rule 3 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Tribunal found that duty on the raw material had been paid, which was not challenged for perversity. The court cited a decision of the Madras High Court, stating that when duty is paid on raw material, the exemption automatically applies. The court found the facts in the present case similar to the cited case, leading to the dismissal of the appeal as there was no reason to interfere with the Tribunal's decision.

2. The second issue pertains to the Tribunal setting aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals-I), Hyderabad against the respondent for availing credit in violation of Rule 3 read with Rule 9(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The court, however, upheld the Tribunal's decision based on the fact that duty on the raw material had been paid. Since this fact was not disputed, the exemption applied automatically, and the court found no grounds to interfere with the Tribunal's judgment.

In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the appeal against the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing that when duty is paid on raw material, the exemption applies automatically, as established in previous legal precedents. The court's decision was based on the factual findings and the application of relevant legal provisions, leading to the rejection of the appeal.