2010 (3) TMI 656 - HC - Central Excise

High Court affirms Tribunal's revenue-neutral ruling on Modvat Credit appeal, emphasizing revenue impact's relevance.

COMMR. OF C. EX. & CUS., VADODARA-II Versus INDEOS ABS LIMITED

The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision in an appeal challenging the CESTAT's ruling, emphasizing revenue neutrality. The Court agreed that no ... Goods sold to sister concern – Undervalued - Revenue neutralization – Grievance was that aspect of undervaluation not considered – Held that:- Absence of any substantial question of law, appeal is dismissed. Issues:1. Appeal challenging the decision of the CESTAT.2. Allegation of undervaluation of goods by the assessee.3. Determination of correct assessable value for charging central excise duty based on revenue neutrality.Analysis:Issue 1: Appeal challenging the decision of the CESTATThe appellant raised concerns regarding the decision of the CESTAT to allow the appeal filed by the assessee based on the concept of revenue neutrality. The appellant argued that the CESTAT should have considered the undervaluation of goods, which was discussed in detail by the Adjudicating Authority. However, the Tribunal found that the goods were being cleared to the assessee's sister concern, benefiting from Modvat Credit, making the entire process revenue neutral. The Tribunal's decision was based on the fact that no additional duty was collected by the exchequer due to this arrangement. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing that if no benefit accrued to the revenue, the Tribunal's choice not to address the undervaluation issue did not create any legal flaw in the order.Issue 2: Allegation of undervaluation of goods by the assesseeThe appellant contended that the Tribunal failed to address the issue of undervaluation of goods manufactured by the assessee. However, the Tribunal's focus was on the revenue neutrality aspect, as the duty paid by the assessee was available as credit to its sister concern. Since there was no additional revenue generated for the exchequer, the Tribunal did not delve into the undervaluation issue, deeming it academic in the absence of benefiting the revenue collection. The High Court concurred with this reasoning, stating that the Tribunal's decision was not flawed as no legal infirmity existed in the order due to the non-determination of the undervaluation issue.Issue 3: Determination of correct assessable value for charging central excise duty based on revenue neutralityThe appellant questioned whether the correct assessable value for charging central excise duty could be disregarded solely on the grounds of revenue neutrality. The Tribunal's decision was based on the fact that the duty paid by the assessee was offset by the credit available to its sister concern, resulting in revenue neutrality. Since no additional revenue was collected, the Tribunal did not delve into determining the correct assessable value. The High Court affirmed this approach, dismissing the appeal due to the absence of any substantial legal question. The decision highlighted that in cases where revenue neutrality is established, the determination of assessable value may not be necessary if it does not impact revenue collection.This comprehensive analysis of the judgment from the Gujarat High Court highlights the key issues raised, the arguments presented, and the court's reasoning behind dismissing the appeal.