Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (2) TMI 701

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rgence of a final product or that the manufacture of the final product is complete. Had that been the intent, the words "goods used in or in relation of the manufacture of the said final products" would not have appeared in sub-rule (1) of Rule 57A . Their plain meaning enables us to agree with the Tribunal that the intent of the rule makers was not to disallow credit merely because a contingency over which the assessee had no control takes place. In the present case, none could have predicted a fire occurring in the manufacturing plant of the assessee. That the fire occurred and at the relevant time but the goods were already utilized in the process of manufacturing of the final product, then the credit paid on those goods was admissible. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... confirming the order of Commissioner of Central Excise (A) which set aside penalty U/ sec.173Q on the ground that Rule 571(4) provides that penalty could be arrived at only if the ingredients therein are satisfied ? 2. The facts necessary to answer these questions in brief are that a show cause notice was issued to the respondent- assessee which is engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods viz. paints, varnishes, miscellaneous chemicals and organic surface active agents falling under Chapter 32, 38 and 34 respectively of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. This show cause notice alleged that the assessee had contravened the provision of Rule 57F read with Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, since they had availed and utilis .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ntent was not to allow any credit to be availed of on the duty paid on the inputs unless there is a final product which is manufactured. The words goods used in or in relation to the manufacture of the said final products read in their entirety would mean that there should be a manufacture of the final product. If during the manufacturing process the fire occurred and everything was destroyed, then there was no manufacture of a final product. The final product did not emerge at all. In such circumstances, the credit of inputs was inadmissible. 8. Mr. Motwani appearing on behalf of the assessee , on the other hand, would support the findings of the Tribunal on this aspect. He submits that the position that emerges from a combined readin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ding of Rule 57-A, sub-rule (1). That Rule, to the extent relevant, reads as under: (1) The provisions of this section shall apply to such finished excisable goods (hereinafter referred to as the final products ) as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify in this behalf, for the purpose of allowing credit of any duty of excise or the additional duty under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975), as may be specified in the said notification (hereinafter referred to as the specified duty ) paid on the goods used in or in relation to the manufacture of the said final products [whether directly or indirectly and whether contained in the final product or not] (hereinafter referred to as t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ss of manufacturing of the final product, then the credit paid on those goods was admissible. There is no dispute about these facts, including the fire. In the circumstances, the Tribunal took the view that the language of the Rule does not permit it to agree with the Revenue and deny the credit. 11. The Tribunal has also taken such a view in the case of M/s. Indchem Electronics (supra). The decision of the Tribunal in that case was appealed by the Revenue, but unsuccessfully. 12. Given the language of the Rule and the admitted facts, the Tribunal's conclusion in the present case cannot be termed as perverse or vitiated by any error of law apparent on the face of the record. Consequently, all these questions are answered in favour .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates