TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 261
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Commissioner denying Cenvat credit of Rs. 4,05,55,048/- and imposing penalties under section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 [Act] and Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 [Rules] is assailed by M/s. Neha Industrial Enterprises Ltd. [Assessee], it's Vice President Shri Sanjeev Banerjee [Banerjee] and it's Manager (Accounts) Sri Vibekananda Das [Das] in these three appeals. 2. Excise Appeal No. 51239 of 2022 is filed by the assessee. Excise Appeal No. 51447 of 2022 is filed by Shri Banerjee and Excise Appeal No. 51238 of 2022 is filed by Shri Das. 3. The assessee manufactures cotton yarn and cotton blended yarn falling under chapters 52 and 55 of the Central Excise Tariff. According to the assessee, it cleared these prod....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... manufactured were cleared availing full exemption under Notification No. 30/2004-CE. (iii) Notification No. 30/2004-CE was with a stipulation that no credit of duty on inputs or capital goods could be availed. Later, a corrigendum was issued by the TRU by F. No. 334/3/2004 - TRU.(Pt.1) dated 9.7.2004 as follows: "In the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) No. 30/2004-Central Excise dated the 9th July 2004 published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, sub-section (i) vide GST 421(E), dated 9th July 2004, at page 89, in line 14, For "inputs or capital goods", read "inputs" (iv) Thus there was no bar on availing CENVAT credit on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it of Rs. 13,38,760/- was denied on the ground that the appellant had availed Cenvat credit on inputs used in manufacture of goods exempted from payment of duty under Notification No. 30/2004-CE. This is factually, incorrect. The appellant had not taken Cenvat credit on the inputs. (ix) It took in its CENVAT Account, the amount sanctioned to it by the Assistant Commissioner as refund by order dated 6.6.2017. There was a demand of duty which the assessee had paid partly in cash and partly using Cenvat credit and appealed against the demand. This Tribunal ruled in favour of the assessee. Thereafter, it applied for consequential refund. Part of the refund was granted by the Assistant Commissioner by way of Cenvat credit and the appell....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... rules, 2004. In view of the fact that the such inputs/capital goods exclusively used for manufacture of cotton yarn and cotton blended which was cleared without payment of central excise duty under exemption Notification No. 30/2004-CE dated 09.07.2004. Therefore, the assessee also appears to have contravened the provision of Rules 3, 6 (1) and 6 (4) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The wrongly availed Cenvat credit appears recoverable from them with interest under Rule 14 (1) (i) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11A (1) and 11AA of Central Excise Act, 1944. The assessee is also liable to penalty under Rule 15 (1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC (1) (a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944". 9. Rules 6(1) a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and the rules made thereunder. Explanation 3. - For the purposes of this rule, exempted services as defined in clause (e) of rule 2 shall include an activity, which is not a 'service' as defined in section 65B(44) of the Finance Act, 1994 provided that such activity has used inputs or input services. Explanation 4. - Value of such an activity as specified above in Explanation 3, shall be the invoice/agreement/ contract value and where such value is not available, such value shall be determined by using reasonable means consistent with the principles of valuation contained in the Finance Act, 1994 and the rules made thereunder. (4) No Cenvat credit shall be allowed on capital goods used exclusively in the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....relief of an order of the Tribunal. The Assistant Commissioner had sanctioned part of this refund by way of credit to the Cenvat account. Therefore, the appellant was entitled to this Cenvat credit and this does not violate Rule 6(1) of the Cenvat credit Rules. We find that the Commissioner had, clearly erred in denying the Cenvat credit to this extent. 12. As far as the Cenvat credit on capital goods is concerned, Rule 6(4) prohibits it only if the capital goods are used exclusively for manufacture of exempted goods for a period of two years from installation. The appellant's submission is that it had also paid duty on some of the goods and claimed full exemption only on some goods. In paragraph 7 of the impugned order, the details of t....