2014 (3) TMI 280 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal Grants Stay, Waives Predeposit, Links Appeal with Related Cases

M/s BHEL Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

The Tribunal allowed the stay application, waived the predeposit of duty, and directed the registry to link the appeal with other related cases for ... Cenvat Credit - Supply of goods against ICB without payment of duty - final products were manufactured and cleared without discharging the obligation prescribed under Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2001, the department was of the view that the benefit under the captive consumption notification was not available – Held that:- Assessees prima facie were not required to discharge the obligation prescribed under Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2001 as they were covered by clause (vii) of Rule 6(6), which stipulates that the provisions relating to payment of 10% or 5% as the case may be were not required to be followed as the goods were supplied against I.C.B. in terms of Notification No. 6/02 or 6/06 and therefore, exempted from levy of duty of customs and additional duty as per clause (vii) of Rule 6(6) of the Cenvat Credit Rules - Following decision of assessee's own previous case [2012 (10) TMI 105 - CESTAT, CHENNAI] - Stay granted. Issues:1. Demand of duty on steel pipes used in the manufacture of exempted goods.2. Interpretation of Notification No. 67/95-CE and Notification No. 6/2006-CE.3. Applicability of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.4. Consideration of earlier stay orders by the Tribunal.5. Waiver of predeposit of duty, interest, and penalty pending appeal.Analysis:Issue 1: Demand of duty on steel pipes used in the manufacture of exempted goodsThe applicant, engaged in manufacturing boilers and parts, had two units prior to July 2007. One unit cleared steel pipes to the other unit on payment of duty, with the latter availing Cenvat credit. The units were later merged, and no duty was paid on steel pipes used in manufacturing both dutiable and exempted final products. A show cause notice was issued proposing duty demand on steel pipes used in exempted goods production, leading to confirmation of duty demand by the adjudicating authority.Issue 2: Interpretation of Notification No. 67/95-CE and Notification No. 6/2006-CEThe Tribunal considered the provisions of Notification No. 67/95-CE, which granted exemption on inputs used in captive consumption, subject to certain conditions. The notification did not apply to inputs used in exempted final products unless cleared as specified in the proviso clauses. The Tribunal also analyzed Notification No. 6/2006-CE, which provided nil rate of duty on goods supplied against International Competitive Bidding (ICB).Issue 3: Applicability of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004The Tribunal examined Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, and its clauses regarding exemptions from duties of customs leviable under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. It noted that goods supplied against ICB were exempt from certain provisions of Rule 6, as per the Notification No. 6/06-CE. The Tribunal found that the applicant was covered by the relevant clauses and, therefore, waived the predeposit of duty, interest, and penalty pending appeal.Issue 4: Consideration of earlier stay orders by the TribunalThe Tribunal referred to earlier stay orders in the applicant's case, where it was prima facie established that the obligation under Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules was not required to be discharged due to the goods being supplied against ICB. The Tribunal agreed with the findings of the earlier stay orders and dispensed with the predeposit of duty, interest, and penalty pending appeal.Issue 5: Waiver of predeposit of duty, interest, and penalty pending appealBased on the analysis of the issues and the consideration of earlier stay orders, the Tribunal allowed the stay application, waived the predeposit of duty, and directed the registry to link the appeal with other related cases for further proceedings.Conclusion:The Tribunal's detailed analysis of the issues surrounding the demand of duty on steel pipes used in the manufacture of exempted goods, interpretation of relevant notifications, applicability of Cenvat Credit Rules, consideration of earlier stay orders, and the waiver of predeposit pending appeal resulted in the allowance of the stay application and further proceedings in related cases.