Case Remanded for Review of Cenvat Credit on NEKRTC Vehicles; Adjudicating Authority to Re-examine Documents.

The Tribunal remanded the case to the adjudicating authority, finding that the authorities had not considered the documents submitted by the appellant regarding cenvat credit for NEKRTC vehicles. It was unclear whether the credit was actually availed. The adjudicating authority was instructed to re-examine the facts with the provided documents, and the appellant was to be given a reasonable opportunity for a hearing. The appeal was allowed by remand for further investigation.

---

---

Issues:
The appeal is filed against Order-in-Appeal No. 243/2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals-II), Bangalore.

Facts:
The appellants are engaged in body building/manufacture of motor vehicles under Chapter Sub Heading 8702 9099 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They undertook body building activity for M/s. Ashok Leyland Ltd. and M/s. NEKRTC on duty paid chassis. They availed cenvat credit on materials for body building for Ashok Leyland but not for NEKRTC. After an audit, they reversed cenvat credit of Rs. 4,14,000/- for NEKRTC. A show-cause notice was issued alleging wrongful exemption availed for 55 vehicles cleared to NEKRTC. The demand was confirmed with interest and penalty, leading to the present appeal.

Arguments:
The appellant argued they did not avail cenvat credit for NEKRTC vehicles and maintained separate accounts. They submitted documents supporting their claim, which were not considered by the authorities. They argued that the reversal of cenvat credit should not be considered as availing credit, citing relevant judgments.

Decision:
The Tribunal found that the authorities did not consider the documents submitted by the appellant. It was not determined whether cenvat credit was actually availed for the NEKRTC vehicles. The matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority to examine the facts based on the documents provided by the appellant. The appellant was granted a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The appeal was allowed by way of remand to further investigate the issue.

(Order Pronounced in Open Court on 10 / 10 / 2023)

---