2015 (10) TMI 1369 - AT - Central Excise

Availment of CENVAT Credit - Shortage of inputs - Held that - Issue involved is squarely covered by the appellants own case for the earlier period 2010 (8) TMI 945 - CESTAT MUMBAI . Accordingly, after waiver of the condition of pre-deposit, I took up the appeal for disposal with the consent of both the parties. - As the issue is squarely covered by the decision of this Tribunal cited hereinabove holding that where the shortage below 0.5% of inputs in the course of manufacturing processes Cenvat credit cannot be denied. Following the same, I allow the appeal of the appellants - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Appeal against rejection of Cenvat Credit due to shortage of inputs.
2. Interpretation of Tribunal orders regarding allowable loss of input up to 0.5%.
3. Consistency of Tribunal decisions on Cenvat Credit for shortage of inputs.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed against the rejection of Cenvat Credit by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs due to shortage of inputs. The appellant availed Cenvat Credit for inputs that were volatile in nature, leading to evaporation and shortage. The Commissioner upheld the demand, prompting the appellant to file an appeal before the Tribunal.

2. The appellant argued that Tribunal orders in their other units had allowed for loss of input up to 0.5%. They cited specific Tribunal orders where it was held that losses up to 0.5% were acceptable, and the appellant had paid duty for shortages beyond that threshold. The jurisdictional Additional Commissioner also dropped a demand based on the 0.5% loss. The Revenue representative agreed that the issue had attained finality with various Tribunal orders.

3. The Tribunal analyzed its previous orders related to similar issues. In one case, it was held that losses up to 0.5% were condonable, while in another case, the appeal was allowed based on the Tribunal's previous decision. The Tribunal emphasized that where the shortage of inputs was below 0.5% during the manufacturing process, Cenvat Credit could not be denied. The consistent view of the Tribunal in the appellant's own cases led to the setting aside of the impugned order and the allowance of the appeal.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues, arguments presented by both parties, and the Tribunal's decision based on previous rulings and legal interpretations.