C.C.E And S.T., Rajkot vs Reliance Industries Ltd. on 23 January, 2020

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

C.C.E And S.T., Rajkot vs Reliance Industries Ltd. on 23 January, 2020

Author: J.B.Pardiwala

Bench: J.B.Pardiwala, Bhargav D. Karia

            C/TAXAP/850/2019                                      ORDER




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                          R/TAX APPEAL NO. 850 of 2019

                                    With
                 CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2019
                        In R/TAX APPEAL NO. 850 of 2019
==========================================================
                                 C.C.E AND S.T., RAJKOT
                                         Versus
                               RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. PARTH H BHATT(6381) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR VIPIN JAI, ADVOCATE WITH MS. SHILPA BALANI, ADVOCATE WITH
MS DIMPLE, ADVOCATE WITH MR DILIP L KANOJIYA, ADVOCATE (3691)
for the Opponent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
        and
        HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA

                                   Date : 23/01/2020

                        ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA) ORDER IN TAX APPEAL:

1. This appeal under Section35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 [for short 'The Act, 1944'] is at the instance of the Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Rajkot and is directed against the order passed by the Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zone, Ahmedabad dated 12th March, 2019 in the Appeal No.E/12524/2018.

2. The appellant has proposed the following questions as the substantial questions of law in the appeal.

(i) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal, is right to hold that the Page 1 of 3 Downloaded on : Sat Jan 25 21:06:27 IST 2020 C/TAXAP/850/2019 ORDER Notification No.13/2016CE(NT) dated 01.03.2016 (effective from 01.04.2016) issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, amending the provision of Rule 6 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 has retrospective effect?

(ii) Whether the Hon'ble CESTAT is right to hold that the amendment to rule 6(3A) by Notification No.13/2016CE(NT) dated 01.03.2016 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 is clarifactory in nature?

(iii) Was the Hon'ble CESTAT correct in holding that "Total Cenvat Credit for the purpose of formula under rule 6(3A) is only total Cenvat Credit of common input service and will not include the Cenvat Credit on input//input service exclusively used for manufacture of dutiable goods?

(iv) Was the Hon'ble CESTAT correct in holding that the Commissioner (Appeals) at Rajkot had the jurisdiction to hear the Appeals of the Respondent?

3. We are inclined to admit this appeal only on the following two questions.

(i) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal, is right to hold that the Notification No.13/2016CE(NT) dated 01.03.2016 (effective from 01.04.2016) issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, amending the provision of Rule 6 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 has retrospective effect?

(ii) Whether the Hon'ble CESTAT is right to hold that the amendment to rule 6(3A) by Notification No.13/2016CE(NT) dated 01.03.2016 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 is clarifactory in nature?

4. The other two questions as proposed, in our opinion, cannot be termed as substantial questions of law. The appeal stands dismissed so far as the questions no.2(iii) and (iv) as proposed are concerned.

4. Post the tax appeal for final hearing on 13/02/2020. On the returnable date, notify the matter on top of the board.

Page 2 of 3 Downloaded on : Sat Jan 25 21:06:27 IST 2020

C/TAXAP/850/2019 ORDER To be heard with the Tax Appeal No.849 of 2019 and Tax Appeal No.851 of 2019.

ORDER IN CIVIL APPLICATIONS: The applicant has prayed for the following interim reliefs: [A] be pleased to admit and allow this Application for Stay;

[B] be pleased to direct the Respondent to furnish a bank guarantee equivalent to the amount of refund the Respondent had received pursuant to implementation of the impugned order passed the Hon'ble CESTAT until the final disposal of the Tax Appeal No.850 of 2019.

OR [B] be pleased to direct the Respondent to deposit moneys equivalent to the amount of refund the Respondent had received pursuant to implementation of the impugned order passed the Hon'ble CESTAT in a separate escrow account until the final disposal of the Tax Appeal No.850 of 2019;

[C] Exparte adinterim relief in terms of ParaB may be granted;

2. Having regard to the nature of the reliefs prayed for, we decline to grant any interim relief. The Civil Application is accordingly rejected.

(J. B. PARDIWALA, J) (BHARGAV D. KARIA, J) aruna Page 3 of 3 Downloaded on : Sat Jan 25 21:06:27 IST 2020

Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court