Appeal allowed for petroleum products manufacturer on input credit reversal issue

The appeal was allowed by way of remand, with the matter being sent back to the ld. Commissioner for a fresh decision. This decision was based on retrospective amendments allowing reversal of credit for inputs used in exempted goods, following a previous Tribunal order highlighting similar issues. The appellant, engaged in manufacturing petroleum products for electricity generation, claimed the benefit of a specific notification but was denied by the Department. The appellant's compliance with Rule 6 and reversal of proportionate credit on inputs were key arguments in claiming the exemption.

---

---

Issues involved: Appeal against duty demand and penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 regarding the benefit of Notification 67/95-CE for the manufacture of petroleum products used in electricity generation.

The appellant filed an appeal against the duty demand and penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944, based on Order-in-Original No. CCE/Shillong/07/2007 confirming the demand of Rs. 7.41 Crores. The appellant, engaged in the manufacture of petroleum products for electricity generation, claimed the benefit of Notification 67/95-CE. The Department contended that the electricity generated was used for both refinery and non-refinery operations, denying the benefit of the notification. The appeal was made to challenge this decision (Para 1-2).

The appellant's Chief Finance Manager argued that they had complied with Rule 6 and reversed proportionate credit on inputs, thus claiming the exemption as per law. Reference was made to a previous case where matters were remanded for examination of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, with retrospective effect. The Department, represented by the ld. A.R., supported the findings of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) (Para 3-4).

A previous Tribunal order highlighted a common issue where applicants sought waiver of predeposit of duties and penalties under various rules, including Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules. The Tribunal noted retrospective amendments by the Finance Act, 2010, allowing reversal of credit for inputs used in exempted goods. Consequently, the demands were waived, and the matter was remanded for decision by the Commissioners of Central Excise in line with the retrospective amendments. The present case was remanded to the ld. Commissioner for a fresh decision, following the same approach, with a reasonable opportunity of hearing for the appellants. The appeal was allowed by way of remand (Para 5).

---