2026 (2) TMI 429 - AT - Central Excise

Eligibility for excise duty refund under notification over product classification; prior tribunal decision renders recovery notice unsustainable, appeal allowed

Eligibility for refund under a notification was contested via product classification (light oil / special boiling point spirit versus gas) and recovery ... Eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 33/1999-C.E. - refund of excise duty under Industrial Policy Memorandum - classification of Solvex-GL as light oil (special boiling point spirit) versus gas for exemption - effect of prior tribunal adjudication on subsequent recovery proceedings - prematurity and unsustainability of show cause notice where entitlement has been finally decided - HELD THAT:- Appellant submits that as the issue of sanctioning of the refund claims to the appellant during the impugned period was pending before this Tribunal, Excise Appeal No. 977 of 2011 was filed by the Revenue; that the said issue has been settled by this Tribunal vide Final Order No. 75650 of 2020 dated 14.10.2020 in Excise Appeal No. 977 of 2011 which has dismissed the appeals filed by the Revenue on merits, holding that the said Notification squarely covers the impugned products and the benefit of the same is available to the appellant. Appellant submits that the impugned Show Cause Notice issued to the appellant is premature and therefore the said Show Cause Notice is not sustainable in the eyes of law. We find that the issue as to whether the appellant is entitled to benefit of the Notification(s) as claimed by the appellant, claiming refunds, has been settled by this Tribunal holding that the impugned products, for which the benefit of the said Notification(s) has been claimed by the appellant, are covered under the said Notifications. In view of this, we hold that the appellant has correctly availed the benefit of the Notifications in question. Consequently, the impugned Show Cause Notice issued is not sustainable in the eyes of law. Accordingly, the impugned proceedings are set aside. In the result, the appeal is allowed, with consequential relief, if any. Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 33/1999-C.E. (and related notifications/amendments) for refund of excise duty on the products manufactured (LPG and Solvex-GL) and whether the Show Cause Notice/demand for recovery of refunded duty is sustainable.Analysis: The Tribunal examined prior proceedings and findings concerning eligibility for the Notification(s). The Tribunal recorded that earlier proceedings and a Final Order of this Tribunal had held that the impugned products fell within the scope of the Notification(s) relied upon by the appellant. The Tribunal considered the amendment introduced by Notification No. 21/2007-C.E. and subsequent modified Notification No. 18/2008-C.E., and the initiation of show cause proceedings, in the context of the earlier Tribunal adjudication recognising coverage of the products by the exemption Notification. The Tribunal treated the merits of the appellant's entitlement in light of the prior Tribunal decision and the evidence on classification and production processes presented in the record.Conclusion: The appellant was entitled to the benefit of the Notification(s) for the impugned products and had correctly availed the exemption and consequent refunds; the Show Cause Notice and recovery proceedings are not sustainable and are set aside; the appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any.