9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (8) TMI 1008 - AT - Central ExciseNCCD - whether NCC duty is exempted under N/N. 32/99-C.E? - whether Cenvat credit under the Cenvat Credit Rules can be utilised towards payment of NCC duty? - Held that - the issue is pertaining to the levy of the education cess and secondary higher education cess while the exemption from the payment of duty was granted as per N/N. 9/09 dated 3rd March, 2009 - the issue is squarely covered by our earlier order in the case of Hero Honda Motors Vs. Commr. of Central Excise 2017 (2) TMI 716 - CESTAT NEW DELHI , where it was held that NCCD, Education Cess, Secondary Higher Education Cess which are levied under separate statutory enactments cannot be granted exemption under the notification - Once the final products manufactured are exempted goods, then there is a bar in availing cenvat credit on the inputs/ input services in terms of Rule 6 of the CCR, 2004. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
Issues Involved:
Interpretation of exemption notification - NCCD, Education Cess, and Secondary Higher Education Cess liability. Analysis: The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Kolkata involved a dispute regarding the liability of NCCD, Education Cess, and Secondary Higher Education Cess despite an exemption notification. The issue revolved around whether the appellant was liable to pay these duties even after enjoying the exemption under Notification No. 50/2003. The Tribunal referred to a previous case law where it was observed that the appellant would not be entitled to exemption for these duties despite the general exemption for other excise duties. The Tribunal highlighted that NCCD is a duty of excise levied under Section 136 of the Finance Act, 2001, and is not exempted under Notification No. 32/99-C.E., which pertains to exemption from excise duty in specific regions. The Tribunal concluded that the NCCD, Education Cess, and Secondary Higher Education Cess were payable as the appellant had not paid any duty, and thus, the demands were upheld. The Tribunal emphasized that the exemption notification did not cover NCCD, which is a surcharge under the Finance Act, 2001, and not a duty exempted under Notification No. 32/99-C.E. The Tribunal clarified that the general exemption granted under the notification did not extend to NCCD, Education Cess, and Secondary Higher Education Cess. It was noted that the appellant's issue regarding the levy of education cess and secondary higher education cess was previously addressed in a similar case, and the decision was upheld. The Tribunal upheld the impugned order, dismissing all appeals filed by the appellants for default due to non-pursuance. In conclusion, the judgment highlighted the specific nature of NCCD as a duty of excise and its exclusion from the general exemption provided under the relevant notification. The Tribunal affirmed that the appellant was liable to pay NCCD, Education Cess, and Secondary Higher Education Cess despite the exemption granted for other excise duties. The decision was based on the interpretation of the exemption notification and the legal framework governing the levying of these duties, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the appeals.
|
