9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (8) TMI 886 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT credit - N/N. 44/2001-C.E. (N.T.), dated 26-6-2001 - duty paid indigenous inputs procured against the invalidated Advance Licence - Held that - The issue pertaining to the N/N. 44/2001-C.E. (N.T.) has already come up before the Apex Court in the case of CCE & C v. MDS Switchgear Ltd., 2008 (8) TMI 37 - SUPREME COURT , wherein it was observed that the recipient manufacturer is entitled to avail the benefit. A quantum of duty, already determined by the jurisdictional officer of the supplier unit, cannot be contested or challenged by the officer of recipient unit - credit allowed - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.
Issues:
Whether the assessee was eligible to avail Cenvat credit on inputs procured against an invalidated advance license. Analysis: The appeal was filed against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Jaipur, where the Department challenged the grant of relief to the assessee who had sourced inputs against an invalidated advance license. The original authority held that the assessee was not eligible for Cenvat credit on these inputs. The Tribunal considered the scheme of advance authorization, which exempts customs duties but not excise duties. The question was whether the assessee could avail Cenvat credit on inputs procured against the invalidated license. The Advance Authorization Scheme allows duty-free inputs for export under bond. The assessee had availed Cenvat credit on duty-paid indigenous inputs procured against the invalidated license. The Tribunal referred to a Supreme Court case where it was held that the recipient manufacturer is entitled to avail the benefit of duty paid on inputs. The Tribunal found that the Cenvat credit availed by the assessee on duty paid indigenous inputs was admissible. Therefore, the Tribunal upheld the impugned order granting relief to the assessee. The appeal filed by the Department was dismissed, and the cross-objections were also disposed of accordingly. The decision was pronounced in open court on 5-1-2017.
|
