TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (5) TMI 441
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Durgapur-III Division and affirming the demand of an amount of Rs. 2,92,309/- against the appellant confirmed against the appellant, along with interest and imposing equal amount of penalty upon the appellant. 2. The facts in brief are: 2.1 At its integrated steel plant at Durgapur the appellant manufactures various dutiable iron, steel and allied products, falling under various Chapter Headings of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. For such manufacture a large number of capital goods and input materials are required. The appellant availed cenvat credit on such capital goods and input materials. 2.2 Since long the appellant has been reversing the cenvat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and mixed coke, which were chargeable to nil rate of duty, of quantities of 534.554 MT of mixed coke and hard coke, valued at Rs. 58,43,180/-, during the period July 2010 to February 2011, without maintenance of separate inventory and accounts of inputs and input services and that though the appellant had opted to follow the option of sub-rule 3(ii) and exercised option as per sub-rule (3A), on scrutiny it was found that several specified provisions of Rule 6(3A) had not been followed. Therefore, the option exercised being incomplete, improper and not as per prescribed provisions, was unacceptable and the appellant was liable to pay the amount equal to 5% of the price/value of coke cleared, amounting to Rs. 2,92,309/-, in terms of Rule 6(3....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s finding in the adjudication order and approved by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order. (b) There is no provision in the Cenvat Credit Rules, including in Rule 6(2) or Rule 6(3), which provides that in the event the option exercised under Rule 6(3)(ii) is found to be suffering from some error or inaccuracy or there is alleged non-compliance with certain prescribed procedure required to be followed thereunder or under Rule 6(3A), the option under Rule 6(3)(i) becomes applicable and the assessee is bound to make payment in terms of Rule 6(3)(i) the amount specified therein. (c) Rule 6(3A) of the Cenvat Credit Rules provides for, under clauses (a) and (b) thereof, provisional payments per month of the amount equ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed under Rule 6(3)(ii) becomes non-est in the eye of law or is not effective or cannot be considered as a valid option exercised by the assessee. There is also no such provision in Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, including sub-rules (3) and (3A) thereof. The contrary findings are therefore without any statutory support and devoid of merit. Reliance has been placed in support upon the following decisions: (i) Etrans Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commr. of CGST & C.Ex., 2020 (372) ELT 867 (T-Kol) (ii) Mercedes Benz India (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C.Ex., 2015 (40) STR 381 (T) (iii) Aster Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs & C.Ex., 2016 (43) STR 411 (T). (e) The Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in holding ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tative for the department reiterates the findings in the impugned order and the adjudication order. 6. I find that the issue involved in the present case is no longer res integra. The Hon'ble Telengana High Court, in Tiara Advertising Vs. Union of India (supra), has held that in the event the assessee is found to have availed Cenvat credit wrongly, Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules empowers the Authority to recover such credit which had been taken or utilized wrongly, along with interest and that the statutory scheme does not vest the Revenue authorities with the power of choice under, inter alia, Rule 6(3)(i) of the Cenvat Credit Rules. This decision has been followed by the Division Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Tata Steel Ltd....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ind that the appellant admittedly paid an amount of Rs. 4,06,785/- plus interest, this is not under dispute. Therefore in our view, the appellant have complied with the condition prescribed under Rule 6(3)(ii) read with sub-rule (3A) of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, therefore 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 exemp....