TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (9) TMI 1131
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....with equal amount of penalty under Rule 15 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of motor vehicles and was discharging excise duty on their final products. The appellant is also availing Cenvat Credit of the excise duty paid on the inputs and capital goods as per the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The appellant supplies these motor vehicle parts to various automobile manufacturers like Maruti Udyog, Hyundai Motors, etc. for manufacture of motor vehicles as well as spare parts for after sale service. In automobile industry, it is a normal commercial practice that to increase the market sh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e dated 16.03.2010 was issued to the Appellant proposing demand of Cenvat Credit of Rs. 98,74,704/- on the inputs whose value was written off during the period of January, 2006 to December 2009. 5. After following due process, the Ld. Commissioner vide the impugned order dropped the demand for the period from January 2006 to 10.05.2007 as Rule 3(5B) which was inserted with effect from 11.05.07. Further, the Ld. Commissioner also dropped the demand of credit pertaining to the inputs which were not written off fully. The Ld. Commissioner confirmed the demand of Rs. 58,55,479/- under Rule 3(5B) along with interest and equal penalty under Rule 15 of the Credit Rules. 6. Hence, the present appeal. 7. Heard both the parties and perused the rec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....* Hindustan Motors Ltd. vCCE 2019 (7) TMI 1168-CESTAT Chennai 9. She further submitted that in terms of Rule 3(5B) of the Credit Rules, the appellant was required to reverse credit attributable to slow moving items in respect of which provision for writing off 100% value was created by the appellant. However, in terms of the proviso to Rule 3(5B) itself, if the said goods are used subsequently, the appellant was entitled to take credit of the amount equivalent to the Cenvat Credit paid earlier. She further submitted that when the slow moving items were used, the provision created for writing off their value was released in their books of accounts. During the relevant period, the appellant has released a provision of Rs. 2,53,92,631/- in r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....imitation cannot be invoked. For this submission, she relied upon the following decisions:- * Hindalco Industries Ltd. v. CCE 2003 (161) ELT 346 (Tri.-Del.) * Commissioner of Central Tax v. ABB Limited 2022 (6) TMI 1212- Karnataka She further submitted that regular audits were being undertaken by the department and hence, the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked. She also submitted that the interest cannot be demanded to the extent the Cenvat Credit was not utilised. For this submission, she relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case of CCE v. Grasim Bhiwani Textile Ltd. 2018 (362) ELT 424 (P&H). She also submitted that during the relevant period, neither the rec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the cenvat credit on inputs as per Rule 3(5B) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. During the audit, the department was of the view that the appellant is required to reverse Cenvat Credit availed on inputs which were written off as per Rule 3(5B) of the Cenvat Credit Rules. 13. Further, we find that during the relevant period, there was no recovery mechanism under Rule 3(5B) of the Cenvat Credit Rules and the explanation which was introduced vide Notification No. 3/2013 dated 01.03.2013 was from 01.03.2013 vide which it was provided that if the manufacturer of goods or the provider of output service fails to pay the amount payable under sub-rules (5), (5A), and (5B), it shall be recovered, in the manner as provided in rule 14, for recovery of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ovided in Rule 14, for recovery of CENVAT credit wrongly taken. 8. Learned Counsel have also pressed the ground that as they were not required to reverse the cenvat credit on partial writing down the value of inputs, prior to 01.03.2011, accordingly, we hold that as there was no such legal requirement. The learned Counsel also prays that they are entitled to refund, already reversed credit on account of partial writing down of value, prior to 01.03.2013. 9. In this view of the matter, we hold that the issue has arisen due to change of opinion on the part of the Revenue, but there is no suppression of facts on the part of the appellants. Further, we find that no amount was due to be reversed under rule 3(5B) on the date of issue of sho....