Tribunal rules on transfer of credit & restoration of disallowed credit under excise duty laws

The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Collector of Central Excise, Bhubaneswar, holding that Rule 57H(3) was not applicable for transfer of credit to M/s. Hira Cement Works due to non-fulfillment of conditions. However, the Respondents were granted the benefit accrued under Notification 201/79 for excise duty paid on inputs. The Tribunal directed the restoration of previously disallowed credit to enable its utilization. The decision required the Respondents to use the restored credit amount from their P.L.A. for current clearances, without ordering a refund.

---

---

Issues:
Transfer of credit under Rule 57H(3) | Applicability of Rule 57H(3) | Benefit accrued under Notification 201/79 | Correct application of provisions | Denial of accrued benefit | Restoration of credit | Utilization of credit | Refund of credit

Transfer of Credit under Rule 57H(3):
The Collector of Central Excise, Bhubaneswar appealed against an Order-in-Appeal allowing transfer of credit under Rule 57H(3) for M/s. Hira Cement Works. The Collector contended that Rule 57H(3) was not applicable as Notification 201/79 was rescinded, making the transfer impermissible until Notification No. 83/87. The Tribunal agreed that the provision did not apply as the benefit was not availed immediately before filing the declaration under Rule 57G, thus the Collector (Appeals) erred in allowing the transfer.

Benefit Accrued under Notification 201/79:
The Respondents argued that they were entitled to benefits under Notification 201/79 for excise duty paid on inputs, granulated slag, used in cement manufacture. Despite a procedural objection, the Tribunal had ruled in their favor. The Counsel contended that the rescinding of the notification should not affect their accrued rights, as they were prevented from utilizing the credit by the Department. The Tribunal had directed the restoration of the credit previously disallowed by the Department.

Denial of Accrued Benefit and Restoration of Credit:
The Tribunal emphasized that the restoration of credit, as ordered, was not for new credit but to enable the Respondents to utilize the previously disallowed credit. The Tribunal's decision in a similar case supported the restoration of unutilized credit even after the rescinding of the notification. The Respondents were directed to utilize the restored credit amount from their P.L.A. for current clearances.

Utilization of Credit and Refund:
While not ordering a refund, the Tribunal directed the Respondents to use the restored credit amount from their P.L.A. The decision partially allowed the appeal by setting aside the Order-in-Appeal, subject to the utilization of the credit amount and the release of an equivalent amount in their P.L.A. The judgment was announced in court at the end of the hearing.

---