Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Ruchi Infrastructure Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central ... on 26 December, 2013
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SOUTH ZONAL BENCH BANGALORE Final Order No . 27168 / 2013 Appeal(s) Involved: E/625/2007-SM [Arising out of Order in Appeal 19-2007 dated 22/05/2007 passed by CCE(Appeals), Visakhapatnam. RUCHI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD PORT AREA, BEACH ROAD, KAKINADA, A.P Appellant(s) Versus Commissioner of Central Excise,Service Tax and Customs - VISAKHAPATNAM-II CENTRAL EXCISE BUILDING, PORT AREA, VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH 530035 Respondent(s)
Appearance:
None G.R. KUMAR & CO.
NO.9, MERRY LIFE APPARTMENTS, DOCTOR'S COLONY, PEDA WALTAIR, VISAKHAPATNAM AP 530017 For the Appellant Shri N. Jagdish, Superintendent(AR) For the Respondent CORAM: Honble Shri B.S.V. Murthy, Technical Member Date of Hearing: 26/12/2013 Date of Decision: 26/12/2013 Order Per : B.S.V. Murthy Nobody is present on behalf of the appellant. This matter has been coming up frequently before this Tribunal. On 22/11/2013 on the request of advocate, adjournment was granted to 29/11/2013 but no one was present on 29/11/2013. Today also there is no one present nor is there any request for adjournment.
2. Heard the learned AR.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants are manufacturers of refined edible oils and vanaspathi and also by-products such as distilled fatty acid and acid oil and were availing facility of CENVAT credit. As per the Notification No.4/2005 C.Ex. dt. 01/03/2005, excise duty on refined edible oils, vanaspathi were exempted. The appellants did not pay the duty on refined oils, vanaspathi but paid duty on distilled fatty acid and acid oil. Since the appellants are manufacturing both dutiable and exempted goods w.e.f. 01/03/2005, as per the provisions of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, they are not eligible to avail CENVAT credit on inputs for refined edible oils and vanaspathi as they are cleared without payment of duty. Therefore, the CENVAT credit taken on the inputs need to be reversed or pay an amount equivalent to 10% of sale price of the exempted goods cleared, under the provisions of Rule 6 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Accordingly, the appellants have debited the duty amount of Rs.14,59,881/- in CENVAT credit account and paid interest under protest. Subsequently, they have preferred a refund claim stating that they were under no obligation to reverse the CENVAT credit amount of Rs.14,89,019/-. The adjudicating authority had rejected the refund claim of Rs.14,89,019/- on the ground that the reversal of credit was correctly made. On appeal, the Commissioner(Appeals) upheld the Order-in-Original. Hence the present appeal.
4. I find that in this case there is no dispute and it is an admitted fact that the final products of the appellant viz. vanaspathi and refined edible oil were exempted w.e.f. 01/03/2005. I find that the Commissioner(Appeals) has relied upon the decisions of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Ghaziabad Vs. Explicit Trading and Marketing Pvt. Ltd. [2004(169) ELT 205 (Tri. Delhi)] and CCE, Indore Vs. IVES Drugs (I) Pvt. Ltd. [2005(191) ELT 639 (Tri. Delhi)] wherein it was held that when goods are exempted, credit in respect of inputs lying in stock and in finished goods should be reversed. The SLP filed against the decision in Explicit Trading and Marketing Pvt. Ltd. was dismissed by the Honle Supreme Court. The only ground on which appellants are in appeal is that there is no need for them to reverse the credit and no decision contrary to the ones relied upon by the Commissioner(Appeals) corresponding to the facts of the case has been cited in their appeal memorandum. Under these circumstances, I do not find any merit in the appeal and reject the same.
(Order dictated and pronounced in open court) B.S.V. MURTHY TECHNICAL MEMBER Raja 2