2013 (12) TMI 115 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal orders remand for comprehensive reconsideration, ensuring fair hearing and consideration of all aspects.

The Tribunal allowed the Appeal by way of remand, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive reconsideration by the Adjudicating Authority. The case was ... Availment of benefit of CENVAT Credit on capital goods - Depreciation u/s 32 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 – Documents not produced to adjudicatory authority - Waiver of Pre-deposit – Held that:- The Appellant have recently procured a Certificate from the Income Tax Authority, wherein it certified that the Appellant had not availed depreciation on the capital goods - the Certificate now produced had not been produced earlier before the Adjudicating Authority for scrutiny and consideration – the case is remitted back to the Adjudicating Authority to consider all issues afresh – Decided in favour of Assessee. Issues:Application for waiver of predeposit of CENVAT Credit and penalty under Rule 15 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.Analysis:The Application sought waiver of predeposit of CENVAT Credit and equivalent penalty amounting to Rs.6.84 crore under Rule 15 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Appellant had availed CENVAT Credit on central excise duty paid on capital goods installed in their factory premises from October 2006-07 to 2008-09. Initially, no CENVAT Credit was claimed due to depreciation under Section 32 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. However, in the financial year 2008-09, the Appellant revised their depreciation claims, resulting in the deletion of the earlier depreciation claims and subsequent availing of CENVAT Credit. The Appellant presented a Certificate from the Income Tax Authority confirming the non-availment of depreciation on the capital goods. The Adjudicating Authority did not have the opportunity to review this Certificate, leading to the decision to remand the case for fresh consideration.The key issue in the Appeal was whether the Appellant had availed both depreciation under Section 32 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and CENVAT Credit on the same capital goods. The Appellant contended that after revising their depreciation claims for the financial years 2006-07 and 2007-08, they subsequently availed the CENVAT Credit. The Appellant's submission of the Certificate from the Income Tax Authority certifying the non-availment of depreciation on the capital goods supported their claim. However, this Certificate was not presented before the Adjudicating Authority for scrutiny. The Tribunal found it appropriate to remand the case to the Adjudicating Authority for a fresh review considering all aspects. The impugned Order was set aside, and the case was remanded for a comprehensive reconsideration, ensuring a fair hearing for the Appellant.In conclusion, the Tribunal decided to allow the Appeal by way of remand, indicating that all issues were to be reevaluated by the Adjudicating Authority. The decision highlighted the importance of providing a reasonable opportunity for the Appellant to present their case fully. The Stay Petition was disposed of, and the case was remitted for a fresh determination, keeping all matters open for consideration.