2014 (11) TMI 159 - AT - Central Excise

Appellate Tribunal rules in favor of Central Excise unit on CENVAT Credit eligibility for tubes & flaps

M/s Apollo Tyres Ltd. Versus CCE Vadodara

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled in favor of the appellant, a Central Excise registered unit, regarding the eligibility of CENVAT Credit on ... CENVAT Credit - Credit of the duty paid on the tubes and flaps - Held that:- The tyres in question are not tubeless tyres. They required inner tubes as an essential item for functioning, the flaps are also useful and make the functioning of the tyres more convenient and trouble free. Therefore, while tubes can as well find place as part of component of tyre, the flap will clearly be an accessory as pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant. - Clearly tubes and flaps are accessories and therefore, have to be considered as eligible inputs. On this ground alone, appellant would succeed - Following decision of assessee's own previous case [2014 (4) TMI 300 - CESTAT BANGALORE] - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues:- Eligibility of CENVAT Credit on tubes and flaps as inputs for manufacturing automobile tyres.Analysis:The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad revolves around the eligibility of CENVAT Credit on tubes and flaps as inputs for the manufacture of automobile tyres. The appellant, a Central Excise registered unit, availed CENVAT Credit under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, but was alleged to have availed ineligible credit on tubes and flaps. The Revenue authorities raised demand on the appellant, contending that tubes and flaps were not inputs for tyre manufacturing, as tyres could be marketed without them. The issue was whether tubes and flaps should be considered as inputs. The appellant argued citing a previous Tribunal order in their favor, while the Department referred to a High Court judgment against considering tubes and flaps as inputs.The Tribunal analyzed the arguments and records, noting that the Revenue's stance seemed contradictory as they issued show cause notices while denying CENVAT Credit. Referring to the earlier Tribunal order in the appellant's case, the Tribunal found that tubes and flaps should be considered as eligible inputs as they were essential for the functioning of tyres. The Tribunal also upheld the appellant's claim of reversing CENVAT Credit at the time of clearance. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that there was no justification for the demands raised in the impugned order and set aside the order entirely, providing consequential relief to the appellants.The Tribunal emphasized that in a similar issue in the appellant's previous case, the Tribunal had ruled in favor of the appellant, and there was no reason to deviate from that view. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were allowed. The judgment highlights the importance of considering tubes and flaps as eligible inputs for availing CENVAT Credit in the manufacturing process of automobile tyres, based on their essential role in the functioning and convenience of the tyres.