Sugar cess qualifies as excise duty for CENVAT credit, and the absence of express rule language did not bar entitlement.

Sugar cess paid under the Sugar Cess Act, 1982 was treated as a duty of excise rather than a fee, so the absence of an express reference in Rule 3(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 did not defeat credit entitlement. Relying on an earlier Division Bench decision, the Court rejected the revenue's attempt to deny CENVAT credit on sugar cess and answered the issue against the revenue.

---

---

Issues: Whether sugar cess paid under the Sugar Cess Act, 1982 was eligible for CENVAT credit under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.

Analysis: The controversy had already been decided against the revenue in the earlier Division Bench decision relied upon by the Court. That decision treated the sugar cess as a duty of excise and not as a fee, and held that the absence of an express reference in Rule 3(1) did not defeat entitlement to credit where the levy was in the nature of excise duty.

Conclusion: The claim to deny CENVAT credit on sugar cess was rejected, and the issue was answered against the revenue.

---