9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 366X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... il 2015 to October 2015, availed cenvat credit of Rs. Rs.3,18,86,000/- (Appeal No. E/20161/2017); and for the period from November 2015 to June 2017 (Appeal No. E/21026/2018) they have availed cenvat credit Rs.19,29,95,000/- and cenvat credit of Rs.2,79,200/- which were availed beyond time limit of more than one year on Clean Energy Cess (CEC) on coal paid as per Notification No.1/2010 dated 22.6.2010. Alleging that the said CEC on coal is not a specified duty under Rule 3 of CCR, 2004, show-cause notices dated 02.09.2015, 18.04.2016 and 08.11.2017 were issued for respective periods for recovery of inadmissible cenvat credit along with interest and penalty. On adjudication, the demands have been confirmed with interest and penalty. Hence, the present appeals. 3. At the outset, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is one of the leading manufacturers of paper and paper boards at its factory at Dandeli, Uttara Kannada District, Karnataka. They had availed cenvat credit of duty-paid on the inputs and input services. The appellant had been paying CEC on coal both indigenously procured and imported. It is contended that by virtue of Section 83 of Finance Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tification No.2/2010. Further, he has submitted that the learned Commissioner has erred in taking recourse to Rule 3(4) of CCR, 2004 where credit of any duty specified in subrule (1) shall not be utilised for payment of CEC. Further, it is submitted that this restriction has only been brought at the stage of utilisation of cenvat credit of various duties and taxes which shall not be utilised for payment of CEC. In other words, assessee was required to pay CEC only in cash without utilising any cenvat credit available with him which cannot be led to a conclusion that there is a bar on availment of cenvat credit on CEC paid by a person. Further, he has submitted that the judgment in Deccan Cement Ltd. case (supra) has been challenged before the Hon'ble High Court of Telangana and is pending. 4. Per contra, the learned Special Counsel Shri PRV Ramanan, for the Revenue submitted that the appellant is not eligible to avail cenvat credit of CEC paid by them on coal during the relevant period in terms of provisions of Rule 3(1) of CCR, 2004. It is submitted that CEC is not a specified duties in the List of eligible duties and cesses, for example, Education Cess under Rule 3(1) of CCR, 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fied under Section 37 of the Central Excise Act, 1994, therefore, cenvat credit on CEC is inadmissible. The appellant, on the other hand, heavily relied on the judgment in the case of Shree Renuka Sugars case (supra) in which the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka allowed cenvat credit on sugar cess. We find that the said judgment of the Hon'ble High Court has been distinguished by the Tribunal in Deccan Cements Ltd. (supra) and held that the sugar cess and CEC stands on a different footing, therefore, the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka cannot be made applicable to CEC. Recording reasons, the Tribunal observed as follows: "11. We have considered the arguments on both sides and perused the records. The short point to be decided is whether the appellants are entitled to Cenvat credit of the CEC paid on the coal imported by them or otherwise. The CEC was levied under Section 83 of the Finance Act, 2010 which reads as follows : "83. (1) This Chapter extends to the whole of India. (2) ................................... (3) There shall be levied and collected in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter, a cess to be called the Clean Energy Cess, as duty of ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... redit will be admissible and CEC is not one of them. 14. We have also considered the argument of the appellants that the ratio of judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Shree Renuka Sugars (supra) not being overturned by any superior judicial forum, must apply. On going through the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, we find that in that case the entire Central Excise Act and Rules were applicable to sugar cess but in the case of CEC, only some provisions of Central Excise Act have been made applicable. Section 37 of the Central Excise Act under which the CCR, 2004 as well as other Rules are framed are not made applicable to the CEC. Therefore, the Finance Act itself does not conceive of applying Cenvat Credit Rules to the CEC. In the absence of any explicit provision, they cannot be made applicable to the CEC. In other words, neither does Rule 3 of CCR provide for credit of CEC nor do the provisions of CEC make CCR and any other Rules under Central Excise Act applicable to it. Therefore, this is clearly distinguishable from the case of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Shree Renuka Sugars (supra). 15-18. ........... 19. It m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
