2015 (10) TMI 1642 - AT - Central Excise

Reversal of CENVAT Credit - Whether the appellants are required to reverse the cenvat credit, when the inputs were being admittedly used by them in the manufacture of the final products, which were being cleared on payment of duty, on the ground that the process undertaken by them does not amount to manufacture - Held that - Stands settled by various decisions of the Tribunal but reference can be made to the latest majority decision in the case of M/s. Asian Colour Coated Ispat Ltd. Vs. CCE, Delhi-III 2014 (9) TMI 974 - CESTAT NEW DELHI . Originally there was difference of opinion between the two Members and the matter was referred to third Member. As per the majority decision, the credit cannot be disallowed to the assessee when he has used the same for payment of duty on its final product, when there was no requirement of payment of duty on the final product. As the said decision takes into consideration the entire precedent decisions, by following the same we set aside the impugned order - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Denial of cenvat credit amounting to approximately Rs. 8,00,00,000 on the grounds of manufacturing activity.
2. Requirement of reversing cenvat credit for inputs used in final products.
3. Application of precedent decisions in determining cenvat credit eligibility.

Analysis:
1. The judgment addresses the denial of cenvat credit worth Rs. 8,00,00,000 to the appellant due to a dispute regarding the manufacturing process. The appellant had paid excise duty on final products but faced a show-cause notice proposing credit denial for the period August 2007 to August 2011. The lower authorities had issued impugned orders based on this denial.

2. The key issue revolved around whether the appellant should reverse the cenvat credit for inputs used in manufacturing final products. The Tribunal referred to various decisions, particularly highlighting the case of M/s. Asian Colour Coated Ispat Ltd. Vs. CCE, Delhi-III E/2793-2794/2011-EX(DB) and E/2827/2011-EX(DB). Notably, a majority decision in this case emphasized that credit should not be disallowed if used for duty payment on final products where duty payment was not mandatory. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, providing relief to the appellant.

3. By following the majority decision and considering precedent cases, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant should not be required to reverse the cenvat credit when the inputs were utilized in manufacturing final products. The judgment highlights the importance of consistency in applying legal principles and upholding decisions that align with established precedents to ensure fairness and clarity in tax matters.

This detailed analysis of the judgment outlines the issues addressed, the legal reasoning applied, and the ultimate decision reached by the Tribunal in favor of the appellant based on the interpretation of relevant laws and precedents.