News Update

PM-STIAC discusses accelerating Industry-Academia Partnership for Research and InnovationIndia, Singapore hold dialogue over cyber policy44 bids received under 10th Round of Commercial Coal Mine AuctionsCops arrest former Dy PM of Nepal in cooperative fraud casePuri highlights India's Petrochemical potential at India Chem 2024UN reports record high cocaine production in ColombiaMinister unveils 'Aviation Park' showcasing India's Aviation HeritageED finds PFI wanted to start Islamic movement in IndiaBlocking Credit - Rule 86ASEBI says investors can use 3-in-1 accounts to apply online for securitiesI-T- Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) need not be imposed when assessee moved an adjournment application & later complied with notice u/s 142(1): ITAT4 Kanwariyas killed as vehicle runs over them in Banka, BiharI-T- Accounting principles do not prescribe maintaining of a day-to-day stock register, and the books of accounts cannot be rejected on this basis alone: ITATUN food looted and diverted to army in EthiopiaCus - Alleged breach of conditions for operating public bonded warehouse; CESTAT rightly rejected allegations, having found no evidence of any such breach: HCUS budget deficit surges beyond USD 1.8 trillionST - Onus for proving admissibility of Cenvat Credit rests with service provider under Rule 9(6) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004: CESTATIf China goes into Taiwan, Trump promises to impose additional tariffsRussians love Indian films; Putin lauds BollywoodCus - Classification of goods is to be determined in accordance with Customs Tariff Act & General Interpretative Rules; Country-of-Origin Certificate may offer some guidance, but cannot solely dictate classification: CESTATCus - Benefit of such Country-of-Origin certificates cannot be denied if all relevant conditions are met under the applicable Customs Tariff rules: CESTATCuban power grid collapses; Country plunges into darknessCus - As per trite law, merely claiming a classification or exemption does not constitute mis-declaration or suppression - any misclassification does not equate to willful intent to evade duty: CESTATKarnataka mulling over 2% fee on aggregator platforms to bankroll gig worker welfare fundCus - Extended limitation cannot be invoked in case of assessee who is a regular importer with a consistent classification approach: CESTAT
 
CX - Inputs used in process not considered as manufacture by Department - Duty paid - Credit cannot be denied and duty cannot be again demanded under Section 11D: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

BANGALORE, JUNE 19, 2013: THE assessee took CENVAT credit on inputs which were used in a process which was considered as manufacture. The product that emerged from that process was cleared on payment of duty. This duty payment was partly by debit in PLA and partly by debit in CENVAT account. According to the department, the above process did not amount to ‘manufacture' and hence the respondent ought not to have paid duty on the product. On this basis, CENVAT credit taken on the inputs was sought to be denied. Department also wanted to collect the amount under Section 11D.

In a rather rare and strange situation, the original authority and the appellate authority held in favour of the assessee. But obviously the wiser Committee of Commissioners decided that the matter needs to be appealed to in the Tribunal.

The Tribunal did not find any sustainable ground in this appeal against the concurrent findings of the lower authorities. On the other hand, the counsel for the respondent has placed on record a line of decisions which are to the effect that the CENVAT credit taken on inputs used in the manufacture of finished goods is not liable to be disallowed on the ground that the process in which the inputs were used did not amount to ‘manufacture'. In all the cited cases, the assessees were found to have paid duty on the finished goods.

The Tribunal noted that the respondent had paid duty on their finished products. Naturally, they collected this duty from their customers. The department is asking the party to remit such collections also to the Government under Section 11D of the Central Excise Act. Both the lower authorities eminently negatived this view of the department by holding that section 11D of the Act applied only to a person who had collected duty and not paid to the credit of the Central Government. Indisputably, the respondent paid duty on their finished goods and hence there is no question of a second payment of the same duty to the Central Government under Section 11D of the Act.

The Tribunal found it unfortunate that such concurrent view of the original authority and the appellate authority on the point was sought to be challenged by the department.

(See 2013-TIOL-926-CESTAT-BANG)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri Samrat Choudhary, Hon’ble Deputy CM & FM of State of Bihar, delivering inaugural speech at TIOL Tax Congress 2024.



Justice A K Patnaik, Mentor to Hon'ble Jury for TIOL Awards 2024, addressing the gathering at the event.