2022 (12) TMI 905 - AT - Central Excise

Recovery under Rules 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with section 11A(4) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - manufacturing of Bitumen Emulsion (Excisable) and Blown Bitumen (Non-excisabel) and trading of various items, out of which major items are Anti Corrosive, (Black Bitumen Paint), Bitumen Compound, Debonding strip, Sealing compound and Wrap Crat paper - willful mis-statement or suppression of facts - HELD THAT - The certificate was filed before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) but the same has not been taken into cognizance in the impugned order. On going through the certificate, it is observed that it has been mentioned in the certificate that the company purchases various trading items from various parties by payment of Central Excise duty on prevailing rate. It has been certified that the Company maintains separate register for purchase of trading items. It has been consistently observed by the Tribunal and the Superior Courts that, when separate records are maintained for taxable/exempted items, there is no occasion to reverse the proportionate Cenvat Credit. In the present case, the appellants have all along submitted that they maintained separate records for trading items and this was brought to the notice of the authorities below. Further, the appellant is filling all the statutory returns and therefore the allegation of fraud, collusion or any willful mis-statement or suppression of facts or contravention of any of the provisions of the Act or of the Rules made thereunder with an intent to evade payment of duty is unwarranted. There are no ingredient in the facts of the present case - appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Demand of Central Excise duty on traded items for the financial year 2013-14.

Analysis:
The Appellate Tribunal heard the appeal filed by the appellant, who is engaged in manufacturing and trading activities. A Show Cause Notice was issued demanding Central Excise duty on traded items for the financial year 2013-14. The Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand, and the penalty was imposed. The appellant appealed to the First Appellate Authority, which upheld the decision. The appellant then approached the Tribunal challenging the orders.

The appellant submitted a Chartered Accountant's Certificate stating that they maintained separate records for trading items and did not pass on the Central Excise paid on purchases to customers. The certificate also provided details of purchases and sales of trading items for the financial year 2013-14. The Tribunal noted that maintaining separate records for taxable/exempted items eliminates the need to reverse the proportionate Cenvat Credit. The appellant's compliance with statutory returns and absence of any intent to evade payment of duty were highlighted.

After examining the facts and submissions, the Tribunal found no evidence of fraud, collusion, or willful misstatement by the appellant. Therefore, the impugned orders were set aside, and the appeal was allowed with any consequential benefits as per the law. The Miscellaneous Application for out of turn hearing was disposed of, and the judgment was dictated and pronounced in open court.