2002 (12) TMI 127 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal sets aside penalty, allows Modvat credit for coating material

The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant and ruled that duty should be discharged based on the intrinsic value of the goods, including ... Demand - Modvat/Cenvat Issues:- Appeal against Order-in-Original confirming duty demand and penalty imposition based on Modvat credit reversal after electro deposition coating.Analysis:The appellant, a motor vehicle manufacturer, appealed against an Order-in-Original confirming duty demand and penalty imposition due to the reversal of Modvat credit on parts cleared to the Spare Parts Division after electro deposition coating. The appellant argued that the process of electro deposition coating does not constitute manufacture, and the duty should be discharged based on the credit availed initially. The Commissioner contended that Rule 57F does not apply to processed inputs and duty should be paid on the goods as cleared. The appellant cited precedents like the Asia Brown Boveri case and Maruti Udyog Ltd. case to support their position.The Tribunal analyzed the submissions and highlighted that the inputs were removed after electro deposition coating, distinguishing this case from the Asia Brown Boveri case where inputs were cleared as such. The Tribunal emphasized the language of Rule 57F, focusing on the utilization of inputs in manufacturing or removal for consumption. It was clarified that the duty should be discharged based on the intrinsic value of the goods, including the cost of electro deposition coating, as per the Supreme Court's decision in Sidhartha Tubes Ltd. The Tribunal ruled that the Modvat credit on the coating material could be availed, subject to Excise Authority approval, and no penalty was imposed on the appellant due to the circumstances of the case.In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant and disposed of the appeal accordingly.