2002 (1) TMI 211 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal clarifies duty payment on coal tar, highlights non-manufacturing nature, and reevaluation of Modvatable inputs.

GANGA RASAYANIE Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BOLPUR

The Tribunal remanded the case involving duty payment on coal tar cleared without payment, emphasizing the non-manufacturing nature of coal tar refining ... Modvat/Cenvat Issues:1. Whether the appellants are liable to pay duty on the coal tar cleared without paymentRs.2. Applicability of Rule 57CC in the case of the appellants.3. Proper utilization and accounting of Modvatable inputs in the refining process of coal tar.Analysis:1. The appellants argued that the process of refining coal tar does not change its basic character and composition, maintaining it as coal tar classifiable under Heading 2706.00. They contended that no Modvatable inputs were used in the refining process, except in cases where customers demanded higher quality, leading to the use of some Modvatable inputs with duty credit. The authorities issued show cause notices alleging duty evasion on the ground that the appellants were engaged in manufacturing excisable products and non-excisable coal tar, cleared without duty payment. The authorities confirmed the demands and imposed penalties, which the appellants disputed.2. The appellants' representative argued that Rule 57CC, which requires payment of 8% duty on exempted products where common Modvatable inputs are used, should not apply to them as the refining of coal tar does not constitute manufacturing. The Tribunal noted that the authorities did not consider this aspect and decided to remand the matter for reevaluation. The Tribunal emphasized that Rule 57CC pertains to excisable products chargeable to duty or exempted/nil rated, implying its inapplicability to non-excisable products like coal tar.3. The Tribunal acknowledged the appellants' claim of using Modvatable inputs in a limited number of cases for coal tar refining, with proper credit reversal and separate accounting as per Rule 57CC(9). The Tribunal directed a reexamination of this aspect by the original adjudicating authority. The Tribunal set aside the previous order and remanded the case for a fresh decision considering the observations made regarding the non-manufacturing nature of coal tar refining and the specific usage of Modvatable inputs.In conclusion, the judgment primarily focused on the non-manufacturing status of coal tar refining, the applicability of Rule 57CC in the absence of excisable products, and the proper utilization and accounting of Modvatable inputs in the refining process. The Tribunal's decision to remand the case for a fresh evaluation underscores the need for a comprehensive review based on the specific circumstances and legal provisions involved.