2019 (4) TMI 1682 - AT - Central Excise

Appellate tribunal grants relief for destroyed capital goods, ruling in favor of appellant

M/s Vidyut Metallics Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-III

M/s Vidyut Metallics Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-III - TMI Issues:- Admissibility of remission application against finished and capital goods destroyed due to fire incidence- Non-reversal of MODVAT credit availed on capital goodsAnalysis:*Admissibility of Remission Application:*The case involved a dispute regarding the rejection of a remission application by the Commissioner concerning finished and capital goods destroyed in a fire incident. The appellant's appeal was based on the grounds that the application was rejected due to a delay in reporting the incident and the alleged inadmissibility of MODVAT credit on the damaged goods. The appellant argued that there was no time limit prescribed for filing a remission application and that the internal manual's requirement of reporting the incident within 24 hours was a procedural lapse. Citing relevant case laws, the appellant contended that the duty demand based on the damage assessed by insurance authorities should not lead to the refusal of remission due to an unreasonable delay in reporting. The Tribunal found that the appellant had reported the incident promptly to the Fire Brigade and Police but not to the excise authority, and the delay was due to lack of awareness rather than intentional negligence. Considering the hardship faced by the appellant and the assessment made by the department, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner's order.*Non-Reversal of MODVAT Credit:*Regarding the non-reversal of CENVAT credit on damaged capital goods like plastic moulds, the Commissioner's finding was questioned. The Commissioner had observed that the goods on which MODVAT credit was availed could not be considered as inputs since they were destroyed in the fire and unfit for use in manufacturing final products. The Tribunal noted that under normal circumstances, such goods would be treated as unusable scrap with nil value, and the reversal of credit was not warranted. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal with the consequential relief of accepting the remission claimed and set aside the Commissioner's order dated 26.11.2009.In conclusion, the appellate tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing the appeal and providing relief in terms of the remission claimed and the reversal of MODVAT credit on capital goods destroyed in the fire incident.