Commissioner Of Central Excise & S.T., ... vs M/S. Agarshakti Paper Mills Limited

(Arising out of OIA-KKS/454-457/DAMAN/2008 dated 28.11.2008 Passed by Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise & Customs, Daman.)

Commissioner of Central Excise & S.T., Daman : Appellant (s)

vs.

M/s. Agarshakti Paper Mills Limited : Respondent (s)

Shri Jagannath Viswanath Patil Shri S.B. Dutta Shri Visant Dhanu Mahajan

Represented by :

For Revenue : Shri J. Nagori, A.R.

For Assessee : None

For approval and signature :

Mr. P.K. Das, Hon'ble Member (Judicial)

1 Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

No 2 Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?

3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?

Seen 4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?

Yes

CORAM :

Mr. P.K. Das, Hon'ble Member (Judicial)

Date of Hearing / Decision : 05.01.2015

ORDER No. A/10010-10013/2015 Dated 05.01.2015

Per : Mr. P.K. Das;

These appeals are arising out of a common order and therefore, all are taken up together for disposal. None appears on behalf of the respondents. There is no application for adjournment. As the appeals are old one, I take up the appeals for disposal on the basis of records as available.

2. After hearing the learned AR and on perusal of the records, I find that the respondents were engaged in the manufacture of Paper and Paperboard falling under Chapter 48 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Respondents availed cenvat/ modvat credit on inputs and capital goods. Respondents cleared old and used capital goods during the period March/ April 2004 and they have not reversed the credit. According to the Revenue, respondent should have reversed full cenvat credit taken at the time of receipt of such capital goods.

3. I find, this issue was decided by the Honble Madras High Court in the case of CCE, Salem vs. Rogini Mill Limited - 2011 (264) ELT 367 (Mad.), which was followed by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Hyderabad vs. Navodhaya Plastic Industries Limited - 2013 (298) ELT 541 (Tri. LB). The Honble Madras High Court in the case of Rogini Mill Limited (supra) held that in the case of removal of used capital goods, the depreciated value of such goods to be considered for reversing the cenvat credit availed thereon.

4. In view of the above discussion, the impugned orders are set-aside and the matter are referred back to the adjudicating authority to decide the issue afresh, after considering the decision of the Honble Madras High Court in the case of Rogini Mill Limited (supra) and the Larger Bench of the Tribunal. All the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed by way of remand. Needless to say that the adjudicating authority shall give proper opportunity of hearing to the Respondent before decision.

(Dictated and pronounced in the Court)

(P.K. Das) Member (Judicial) ..KL

3