Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2015 (8) TMI 24

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....demand confirmed in Para 26.1 above, under the provisions of Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AA of the Central Excise Act, 1944. I further order appropriation of the amount of Rs. 20,993 /- already paid by the assessee vide PLA Entry No. 273, dated 13/3/2012 against the aforesaid demand of interest. 26.3 I further impose a penalty of Rs. 24,71,93,529 /- on the assessee, i.e. M/s. Mercedes Benz India (P) Ltd. Chakan, Pune under the provisions of Rule 15(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 27. I give an option to the assessee i.e. M/s. Mercedes Benz India (P) Ltd. Chakan, Pune under Section 11AC(1)(C) of Central Excise, Act, 1944, to pay 25% of the penalty amount as imposed in para 26.3 above, provided the assessee pays the entire amount of demand confirmed in para 26.1 above, alongwith interest payable thereon as ordered in para 26.2 above as well as the reduced 25% penalty imposed under Section 11AC ibid, within thirty days of the date of communication of this order. 2. The fact of the case is that appellant, M/s. Mercedes Benz India (P) Ltd. are engaged in the manufacture of motor vehicle i.e. pa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....heir letter dated 14/3/2012. 2.3 The show cause notice was issued wherein it was alleged that the appellant while reversed the amount of Cenvat Credit and paying the interest had not followed the procedure as laid down in sub rule 3A (a) and (b) of the said rules respectively, inasmuch as they had neither exercised these option by intimating the same in writing to the superintendent of central Excise giving required particulars nor have they determined and paid any amount provisionally for every months. Further this amount cannot be treated as final determination of the whole financial year as envisaged under sub rule 3A(c) of the said rule. Thus by not following laid down procedure as envisaged under sub rule 3A(c) of the said rule the appellant becomes liable to calculate and pay amount equivalent to 5% of the value on exempted services. 2.4 In view of the above allegation show cause Notice No. 35/P-V/R-CKN/COMMR/2012 dated 13/4/2012 proposed demand of Rs. 24,71,93,529/- which is equivalent to 5% of the value of traded goods i.e. Rs. 494,38,70,577/- on exempted services i.e. trading activity of the motor vehicle. It was also proposed to adjust an amount of 4,06,785 /- already p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nterest of Rs. 20,993 /- was also paid on 13/3/12. Reversal of the credit was intimated to the department vide letter dated 14/3/2012. Ld. Commissioner, without considering ratio of turnover from manufacturing activity vis a vis trading activity has merely confirmed the demand at 5% of the total exempted turnover i.e. trading of imported cars which cannot be sustained and being completely perverse the impugned order is liable to be set aside. (c) Ld. Commissioner confirmed the demand equivalent to the 5% of the trading turnover despite admitting the fact that the appellant have reversed the required credit alongwith interest, mainly on the ground that appellant have not complied with the condition and procedure laid down under Rule 6(3)(ii) read with rule 6(3A) of CCR, Rules. The appellant submits that they have correctly exercised the option under Rule 6(3A) for reversing the credit under Rule 6(3)(ii). As per sub rule (3A) the assessee is required to intimate while exercising the option provided under Rule 6(3)(ii) to the Jurisdictional superintendent and the intimation should contain the prescribed particulars specified under clause (a) of sub rule (3A) of Rule 6 of CCR, 2004.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....timation to the department clearly shown that date of option is from 1st April 2011, description of dutiable goods and exempted goods have also been intimated to the superintendent. (e) As regard the Cenvat Credit of input and input services lying in balance, the same has been declared by the appellant in their monthly ER1 return. Therefore, even if it is assumed, that these information have not been intimated to the superintendent under intimation the same were otherwise available with the department at all the time. Moreover the intimation has been given by the appellant vide their letter dated 14/3/2012, therefore, even if the intimation in the prescribed format was not given but information required therein was otherwise very much provided to the jurisdictional Central Excise authority. In view of this fact, it cannot be said that the appellant have not complied with the procedure as laid down. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel that is not provided under the law that if there is any procedure infraction in availing the option of Rule 6(3)(ii), the option provided under Rule 6(3)(i) shall automatically apply. Two options have been provided under the law to the assessee. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eginning of the financial year, have not intimated in writing to the Jurisdictional superintendent regarding the availment of the option provided under clause (ii) of Rule 6(3). They have not furnished the information as provided under clause (i) to (v) of sub clause (a) of Rule 6(3A). 4.1 The appellant failed to calculate Cenvat credit to reversed on monthly basis, therefore the substantive requirement of procedure was not followed. It was time and again held by the Apex court that in order to avail any benefit provided under the statue, procedure and conditions prescribed thereto should be scrupulously followed and in absence of compliance of condition and procedure, the appellant renders themselves disentitle for the benefit of option provided under rule 6(3)(ii). Once the appellant became disentitle for this option, the other option available is under rule 6(3)(i), therefore appellant had no option except to follow the provision of Rule 6(3)(i) and accordingly they were required to pay 5% of the value of the exempted services (trading of cars). 4.2 Ld. A.R. in support of his submission that procedure must be scrupulously followed, else benefit provided under law, the benefit ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r provision of exempted services except, in the circumstances mentioned in sub-rule (2). [Provided that the CENVAT credit on inputs shall not be denied to job worker referred to in rule 12AA of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, on the ground that the said inputs are used in the manufacture of goods cleared without payment of duty under the provisions of that rule. [Explanation 1. - For the purposes of this rule, exempted goods or final products as defined in clauses (d) and (h) of rule 2 shall include non-excisable goods cleared for a consideration from the factory. Explanation 2. - Value of non-excisable goods for the purposes of this rule, shall be the invoice value and where such invoice value is not available, such value shall be determined by using reasonable means consistent with the principles of valuation contained in the Excise Act and the rules made thereunder.] [(2) Where a manufacturer or provider of output service avails of CENVAT credit in respect of any inputs or input services and manufactures such final products or provides such output service which are chargeable to duty or tax as well as exempted goods or services, then, the manufacturer or provider of outp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (i) shall be an amount equal to 2 per cent. of value of the exempted services.] Explanation I .- If the manufacturer of goods or the provider of output service, avails any of the option under this sub-rule, he shall exercise such option for all exempted goods manufactured by him or, as the case may be, all exempted services provided by him, and such option shall not be withdrawn during the remaining part of the financial year. Ld. Adjudicating Authority demanded 5% of the total sale of the trading turnover of goods on the ground that option provided under Rule 6 (3) (i) is applicable on the ground that claim of the appellant on the option provided under Rule 6(3)(ii) is not available for the reason that appellant has not complied with condition provided under sub Rule (3A) of Rule 6 which provides that manufacturers of the goods shall follow certain procedure and conditions as provided under Sub Rule (3A)(a) (i) to (iv) inasmuch as the appellant have not given said information in writing to the Jurisdictional Superintendent of Central Excise. Secondly the appellant, as provided under Clause (b) of sub rule (3A) have not paid the amount of Cenvat on monthly basis and paid after....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ry month. The appellant though belatedly calculated the amount required to be paid in terms provided under Rule (3A) of Rule 6, therefore to fulfil the condition, assessee should pay the said amount, which has been complied by the appellant. 5.2 As regard the delay in payment, if any, the appellant have discharged the interest liability on such delay. Regarding the compliance as provided under Clause (a) of Sub Rule (3A) of Rule 6 the appellant while exercising this option is required to intimate in writing to the Jurisdictional Superintendent, Central Excise, the following particulars namely: (i) Name, address and registration No. of the manufacturer of goods or provider of output service; (ii) Date from which the option under this clause is exeertised or proposed to be exercised; (iii) Description of dutiable goods or taxable services; (iv) Description of exempted goods or exempted services; (v) Cenvat credit of inputs and input services lying in balance as on the date of exercising the option under this condition. As per the submission of the appellant and perusal of their letter alongwith enclosed details, it is found that more or less all these particulars were int....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....demand of huge amount of Rs. 24,71,93,529/- of the total value of the vehicle amounting to Rs. 494,38,70,577/- sold in the market cannot be demanded. We are also of the view that Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules is not enacted to extract illegal amount from the assessee. The main objective of the Rule 6 is to ensure that the assessee should not avail the Cenvat Credit in respect of input or input services which are used in or in relation to the manufacture of the exempted goods or for exempted services. If this is the objective then at the most amount which is to be recovered shall not be in any case more than Cenvat Credit attributed to the input or input services used in the exempted goods. It is also observed that in either of the three options given in sub rule (3) of Rule 6, there is no provisions that if the assessee does not opt any of the option at a particular time, then option of payment of 5% will automatically be applied. Therefore we do not understand that when the appellant have categorically by way of their intimation opted for option provided under sub-rule (3)(ii), how Revenue can insist that option (3)(i) under Rule 6 should be followed by the assessee. 5.5 As d....