M/S. Venkatesh Beverages Ltd vs Cce-Bhopal
- CitationAppeal No. E/3980/2006-EX [DB]
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
A manufacturer is not required to reverse CENVAT credit taken correctly on inputs or capital goods at a time when the final product was dutiable, merely because the final product later becomes exempt from duty.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
[Arising out of Order-in-appeal No. 199/CE/Appeal/Bhopal/2006 dated 21.09.2006 passed by Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Customs & Central Excise, Bhopal]
1. Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for Publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it would be released under Rule 27 of the 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?
4. Whether order is to be circulated to the Department Authorities?
M/s. Venkatesh Beverages Ltd. Appellant
VS.
CCE-Bhopal Respondent
Appearance: Shri Vipul Aggarwal, Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Ranjan Khanna, DR for the respondent
Coram: Honble Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)
Honble Shri B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical)
Final Order No. 52382/2015
Per: Ashok Jindal
The short issue involved in this matter is that whether appellant is required to reverse the CENVAT Credit taken by them on inputs/capital goods when their final product become exempt or not. The issue come up before this Tribunal in the case of Tafe Limited (Tractor Division) Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore reported in 2007 (210) ELT 571 (Tri-Bang) wherein it has been held that appellant is not required to reverse the CENVAT Credit if on later date, their final product become exempt. The said view has been affirmed by the Honble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCE Vs. Tafe Ltd. reported in 2011 (268) ELT 49 (Kar) and SLP against the said order has been dismissed by the Honble Apex Court vide order dated 16/09/2011. Therefore, issue is no more res-integera. In these terms, we hold that the appellant is not required to reverse the CENVAT Credit on inputs/capital goods which were taken correctly when their product was dutiable but on later date, their final product has become exempt. In these terms, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief, if any.
(Ashok Jindal)
Member (Judicial)
(B. Ravichandran)
Member (Technical)
Ritu
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free