9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1517X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Appellant is engaged in the manufacture and clearance of Aerated water and Fruit based drinks (in short 'final products') falling under Chapter- 22 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 on payment of applicable excise duty. The Appellant operates under the Cenvat Credit Scheme and Sugar is one of the principal ingredients in the manufacture of their dutiable final product. 2.2 Proceedings were initiated against the Appellant by a Showcause Notice dated 29 June 2018 proposing denial of Cenvat Credit of Sugar Cess aggregating Rs. 2,32,11,708/- claimed by the Appellant in the ER-1 return for the month of June 2017 on two grounds. Firstly, Sugar Cess is not expressly stipulated as a levy on w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the credit was originally taken within the period of limitation but reversed thereafter on being objected by the revenue under protest while reserving the right to take recredit if such reversal was found unwarranted in law. Therefore, this was a case of recredit, and no time limit could be applied to such recredit in view of Circular No. 990/14/2014-CX-8 dated 19 November 2014. Reliance in this regard was also placed upon the following decisions: * Commissioner of Ex., Kolkata - II Vs. Rahee Industries Ltd. - 2011 (263) ELT 225 (Cal.) Para 6; * Suman Controls Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Service Tax and Customs, Bangalore-II Para 4 The Learned AR vehemently argued that the decision relied upon by the Adjudicating Au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e and against the revenue. On the other hand, none of the decisions relied upon by the Adjudicating Authority are dealing with the issue of eligibility of Cenvat Credit of Sugar Cess levied under the Sugar Cess Act. Therefore, the decisions relied upon by the Learned Adjudicating Authority has no application to the issue involved herein as a judgement is only an authority for what it decides and not what can be inferred therefrom. 5. We also find from the case records that the credit pertaining to the period September 2009 to August 2014 was taken for the first time in August 2014 itself under due intimation to the revenue authorities whereas the time limit for the purposes of taking credit was introduced for the first time only with effec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
