9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 937X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ni against central excise invoice. The same was cleared on payment of duty to M/s Universal Hydrocarbon Company Limited (UHCL) for manufacture of CPC. UHCL availed the Cenvat credit equivalent to the amount of Central Excise duty paid on the quantity of RPC so sent by the appellant. After processing, UHCL cleared the CPC to the Appellant on payment of duty, under the cover of excise invoices and the Appellant availed the Cenvat credit on the same. Thereafter, the Appellant further undertook processing of mixing of different qualities of their manufactured CPC, sizing, quality check and packaging and cleared the same, on payment of duty, to customers 2.1 Further during the relevant period (i.e. 2004-05 and 2005-06), the final products were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lso proposed to levy interest and impose penalty. The Notice was adjudicated by the Adjudicating Authority vide Order-in-Original dated 26.08.2011 wherein the demands made in the Notice were confirmed along with interest and penalty. Aggrieved against the impugned order, the Appellant has filed the present appeal. 5. Regarding the allegation of wrong availment of Cenvat Credit amounting to Rs. 56,84,436/-, the Appellant stated that once the duty has been paid by the assessee and the materials were received into the factory, Cenvat credit cannot be denied. In this regard, they referred the following judgments in support of their contention: * Commissioner of Central Ex. & Cus. Vs Creative Enterprises [2009 (235) E.L.T. 785 (Guj.)] * Utt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... qual to the credit availed in respect of such inputs. In the present case, the Appellant has paid much more central excise duty than the CENVAT Credit availed by them on CPC received from UHCL which would be clear from the statement annexed to the compilation. In that event, the Appellant cannot be asked to reverse the CENVAT Credit once again. In this regard, they referred to the judgments of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Commr. of C. Ex. Vs M/s Hansa Tube Pvt. Ltd. [2023 (2) TMI 549 - P&H] 6. The Appellant contended that extended period of limitation cannot be invoked when there is no suppression of facts on their part. Accordingly, they prayed for setting aside the demands confirmed in the impugned order. 7. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able goods are to be sold" can only be the manufacturer's premise and if the contention of the Revenue is accepted, the said words will have to be substituted by the words "have been sold" which would only then have possibly have reference to the buyer's premises. The Court also gave a specific finding in para 32 with regard to the decision in Roofit Industries case, wherein it observed that the attention of the Court was not drawn to Section 4 as originally enacted and as amended to demonstrate that the buyer's premises cannot, in law, be the place of removal under the said provisions. Relevant paragraphs of the judgment are reproduced below:- "16. It will thus be seen that where the price at which goods are ordinarily sold by the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... livery which may, on facts, be the buyer's premises." 8. ...........................In the instant case before us, the issue whether or not place of removal can be manufacturer's premises or buyer's premises has since been settled by the Apex Court in Ispat Industries (Supra), which has to be respectfully followed for the purpose of assessment of duty as per law. [Emphasis Supplied] 10. Following the ratio of the decision cited above, we hold that the transportation charges are not includable in the assessable value. Accordingly, the demand of central excise duty of Rs.15,22,175/- confirmed in the impugned order on the ground of non-inclusion of transportation charges is not sustainable. 11. Regarding the second issue of denial of Cen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e CENVAT Credit availed by them on CPC received from UHCL which would be clear from the statement annexed to the compilation. In that event, the Appellant cannot be asked to reverse the CENVAT Credit once again. This view has been taken by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs Delta Corporation, reported in 2013 (287) ELT 15 (Guj). The relevant part of the decision is reproduced below: 6. It is the case of the Revenue that in terms of such Rules since the respondent did not carry out any manufacturing activity on the PD Pumps purchased before clearance of home consumption, Modvat credit could not be availed. 9. It was in this context that the Tribunal in the impugned judgment referred to and rel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
