2005 (4) TMI 192 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal Grants Deemed Credit on Processed Fabrics; Applies Liberal Interpretation and Legal Precedents in Ruling.

The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Appellants, granting them the benefit of deemed credit under Notification No. 6/2002-C.E. (N.T.). It determined that ... Cenvat/Modvat - benefit of deemed credit in terms of Notification No. 53/2001-C.E. (N.T.) - Processing of cotton fabrics and MM Fabrics - excise duty - inputs - additional duty - HELD THAT:- It is not in dispute that the fabrics which is processed by the appellants contain yarn which is declared as inputs in the Notification. This view also gets support from the Budget Speech of the Hon'ble Finance Minister, made at the time of presenting the Budget Speech for 1996-97 wherein it was mentioned that the processors would be in a position to Modvat the duty paid on yarn imputed on the basis that yarn accounts for 50% of the value of the finished fabrics. Finance Minister had adopted a simple procedure of imputed value to avoid the imposition of basic duty on grey fabrics being manufactured by thousands of powerlooms. The Board has also clarified vide Circular No. 243/77/96-CX., dated 3-9-1996 that the rate of deemed credit in case of fabrics is in lieu of duty paid on inputs by the processors. It is not the case of the Revenue that the declared inputs i.e. yarn is not contained in the final products. If the contention of the Revenue is accepted, manufacture other than the composite mill will never be eligible to avail the deemed credit under Notification as they will always be bringing only the fabrics whether cotton or man-made for the purpose of processing and column No. 2 of the Notification does not mention any Heading under which fabrics fall. Further Serial No. 2 as well as Serial No. 3 of the Notification No. 6/2002 will be completely redundant as these Serial Nos. provide the facility of deemed credit to the goods manufactured by a manufacturer other than the composite mill. Following the decision in the case of Kamrup Industrial Gases Ltd. v. CEGAT [2003 (5) TMI 72 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD], we hold that the appellants herein are eligible for availing the deemed credit under Notification No. 6/2002. Consequently, both the impugned orders are set aside and all the three appeals are allowed. Issues:- Whether the benefit of deemed credit is available to the Appellants under Notification No. 6/2002-C.E. (N.T.), dated 1-3-2002.Analysis:1. Appellants' Arguments: The Appellants, engaged in processing cotton fabrics and MM Fabrics, claimed deemed credit under Notification No. 53/2001-C.E. (N.T.), which was superseded by Notification No. 6/2002. They argued that the grey fabrics they processed contained yarn, which was declared as an input for deemed credit. They referenced Budget proposals and Circulars to support their claim, highlighting that the Modvat scheme aimed to integrate the textile sector with central excise duties. They also cited previous cases where deemed credit was allowed on fabrics based on yarn content.2. Department's Arguments: The Department contended that the fabrics processed by the Appellants were not specified as inputs in Notification No. 6/2002, hence deemed credit was not applicable. They emphasized strict interpretation of exemption Notifications and cited legal precedents supporting their stance.3. Tribunal's Decision: The Tribunal analyzed Rule 11 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, which allowed deemed credit even if declared inputs were not directly used in final products but were contained in them. The Tribunal noted that the fabrics processed by the Appellants contained yarn, a declared input. They referred to Budget speeches and Circulars to justify their decision. Additionally, they highlighted that denying deemed credit to independent processors would render certain provisions redundant. Citing legal principles and previous tribunal decisions, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the Appellants, allowing deemed credit under Notification No. 6/2002.4. Legal Precedents and Principles: The Tribunal referenced the principle of avoiding constructions that render statutes futile and emphasized interpreting laws liberally to uphold their intent. They cited previous cases where similar benefits were extended to processors based on Circulars and Notifications. By applying these principles, the Tribunal concluded that the Appellants were eligible for deemed credit under Notification No. 6/2002, setting aside the impugned orders and allowing all three appeals.