9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (10) TMI 222 - AT - Central ExciseBar on utilization of CENVAT credit - Liability to pay duty during the default period i.e. from 01.01.2012 to 31.03.2012 from cash without utilizing the cenvat credit - Rule 8(3A) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 - HELD THAT - In case of Indsur Global Ltd. 2014 (12) TMI 585 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT , the Hon ble Gujarat High Court held the provision of Rule 8(3A) as ultravirus. The consequential effect of the said judgment is that the assessee is allowed to pay the excise duty by utilizing the cenvat credit during the default period also. Following the said Hon ble High Court judgment, this Tribunal has passed various judgments in favour of the assessee. Considering this settled legal position which is in favour of the appellant, the impugned order is not sustainable - Appeal allowed.
Issues involved: Whether the appellant is liable to pay duty during the default period without utilizing cenvat credit u/s Rule 8(3A) of Central Excise Rules, 2002.
Comprehensive details of the judgment: 1. The appellant's counsel argued that the bar on utilizing cenvat credit during the default period of monthly duty payment under Rule 8(3A) was deemed ultravirus by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Indsur Global Ltd. vs UOI. Subsequent judgments like Novatur Electrical & Digital System P. Ltd., Essar Steel India Ltd., Meenakshi Associates, and others followed this precedent, allowing cenvat credit utilization during default periods. 2. The Revenue's representative reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 3. Upon careful consideration and record perusal, it was found that the main issue was whether the appellant could use cenvat credit for excise duty payment during default periods as per Rule 8(3A). The Gujarat High Court's ruling in Indsur Global Ltd. case rendered Rule 8(3A) provisions ultravirus, enabling assessees to utilize cenvat credit even during default periods. This Tribunal had also issued judgments favoring assessees in line with the High Court's decision. 4. Given the established legal position favoring the appellant, the impugned order was deemed unsustainable and set aside, thereby allowing the appeal. (Separate judgement not delivered by the judges) (Pronounced in the open court on 15.09.2023)
|
