9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 125X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s surprising that the exercise of revocation has been undertaken by the tax authorities for recovery of credit, taken under CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, of duty discharged by the appellant at the time of import and utilised towards partial discharge of duty liability arising on clearance of goods; it does not appear to us that there is sound logic in appellant choosing to discharge duty liabilities, at different stages, on goods that were ultimately to be exported and to be unduly benefited from the exchequer when all that was sought to be reimbursed were the very same duties that were eligible to be neutralised upon exports. Revocation of registration, not provided for in Central Excise Rules, 2002 and only in exercise of power of Central Board of Excise Customs (CBEC) to specify conditions, safeguards and procedure in rule 9(3) of Central Excise Rules, 2002, can be triggered only within the rigour therein and with discharge of duty liability certainly not being breach of Act or Rules, the revocation upheld by the first appellate authority is not valid in law. Duty on final product having been discharged by the appellant, and not excluded, by any stretch, from the definition of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 2002, amended inclusion of supporting manufacturer in the licence, the absence of factory address in the bills of entry, the belated allotment of space without any machinery to the appellant by M/s Maharashtra Seamless Ltd and lack of records of employees or energy consumption were evidence led for revocation of registration and recovery of wrongfully availed credit. 2. Learned Counsel for the appellant contends that they had, on 8th February 2008, obtained registration of factory premises, admeasuring 1164 sq yards leased from M/s Maharashtra Seamless Ltd vide agreement of 1st February 2008, upon completion of all procedural requirements to the satisfaction of the competent authority. It is further submitted by him that it was with the intent of installing endfacing machine that they had applied for central excise registration on 4th February 2008 but decided to get the entire manufacture carried out by job-worker as provided for in rule 4 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and end-facing of the the resultant seamless steel pipes as well as repairs were carried out at the premises of the appellant or, occasionally, by them at premises of the job-worker before being expo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f central excise is not correct as non6 liability to such levy rendered the said payments to be nothing other than deposit. He relied upon the statements of Mr SK Sharma and of Mr RS Gupta as evidence of non-installation of machinery in the premises of the appellant as well as letter of 12th February 2009 of the appellant admitting to the same. He submitted that there is no provision in law for merchant-exporter to avail CENVAT credit and that the decisions cited by Learned Counsel does not comes to the assistance of the appellant. 5. There is no doubt that the connecting of the dots by Learned Authorized Representative does present a tale that could, in a seminar on moral science, elicit outrage stemming from bare acquaintance with taxing statute. That two separate proceedings for deregistration of premises and for recovery of credit alleged to have been wrongly availed - with, possibly, a third for recovery/denial of rebate claimed by the appellant had been contemplated, and in sequence, for setting the stage for denial of rebate, however, implies an entirely different scenario of distinct, and unconnected, elements of law coverage under Central Excise Act, 1944, entitle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le for any reason whatsoever, may be removed by reversing of CENVAT credit availed on receipt of inputs. There is also no dispute that job-work procedure, in relation to CENVAT credit, has been duly complied with. 7. The sole issue that remains is fitment of the appellant within Central Excise Act, 1944 as a registered manufacturer. A plain reading of 6. Assessment of duty. - The assessee shall himself assess the duty payable on any excisable goods: along with (c) assessee means any person who is liable for payment of duty assessed or a producer or manufacturer of excisable goods or a registered person of a private warehouse in which excisable goods are stored and includes an authorised agent of such person; in Rule 2 therein and 9. Registration . - (1) Every person, who produces, manufactures, carries on trade, holds private store-room or warehouse or otherwise uses excisable goods or an importer who issues an invoice on which CENVAT credit can be taken, shall get registered. of Central Excise Rules, 2002, does not, of itself, suffice to make out a case of ineligibility for registration. Furthermore, revocation of registration certific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ising thereon. To be permitted to do so would amount to placing conditions within the charging provision of Central Excise Act, 1944 that was not contemplated by the legislating authority. Contrary to the assumptions implicit in the proceedings culminating in the two impugned orders, levy of tax is not intended to be contingent upon net benefit deriving to the exchequer. We may even venture to state that the complexity of the commercial engagement undertaken by the appellant herein is comparable to the complexity of the process, and logic, adopted by the lower authorities for detriment visited upon the appellant by the impugned orders. 8. It is no less surprising that the exercise of revocation has been undertaken by the tax authorities for recovery of credit, taken under CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, of duty discharged by the appellant at the time of import and utilised towards partial discharge of duty liability arising on clearance of goods; it does not appear to us that there is sound logic in appellant choosing to discharge duty liabilities, at different stages, on goods that were ultimately to be exported and to be unduly benefited from the exchequer when all that was sought ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
