TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal permits using duty credit for NCCD on final product under Cenvat Credit Rules</h1> <h3>PRAG BOSIMI SYNTHETICS LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., DIBRUGARH</h3> PRAG BOSIMI SYNTHETICS LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., DIBRUGARH - 2007 (216) E.L.T. 254 (Tri. - Kolkata) Issues:1. Whether the credit of basic duty earned by the appellants can be used for payment of NCCD on the final product.2. Interpretation of Notification No. 32/99 regarding refund of duty paid in cash through PLA.3. Disallowance of utilization of basic duty credit for payment of NCCD by the adjudicating Commissioner.Analysis:1. The Tribunal considered whether the credit of basic duty earned by the appellants could be utilized for payment of NCCD on the final product. The Tribunal noted that the issue at hand was distinct from a decision of the Bangalore Bench and allowed the modification of the stay order. The appellants had not paid NCCD by cash and were not seeking any refund under Notification No. 32/99. The Tribunal found that under Rule 3(4) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, Cenvat credit could be used for payment of any duty of excise on the final product. As NCCD was considered a duty of excise, the credit of basic duty of excise had to be allowed for payment of NCCD.2. The Tribunal addressed the interpretation of Notification No. 32/99, applicable to goods manufactured in the North Eastern Region, allowing a refund of duty paid in cash through PLA. The appellants clarified that they had not paid NCCD by cash and were not seeking any refund under this notification. Therefore, the appeal did not involve the interpretation of Notification No. 32/99.3. The Tribunal examined the disallowance of utilizing the credit of basic excise duty for payment of NCCD by the adjudicating Commissioner. It was clarified that the appellants had partly paid NCCD on the final product by utilizing the credit of NCCD paid on the inputs and the remaining part by using the credit of basic excise duty. The Tribunal referred to Rule 3(7) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, which restricts the utilization of credit for specific duties. However, this restriction did not apply to the credit of basic excise duty, which could be used for payment of any duty of excise. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, granting consequential benefit to the appellants.
TaxTMI 