Dismissed

Commissioner of Central Excise, Jalandhar v. M/S International Tractors Ltd.

Punjab & Haryana HC18 Feb 2010CEA/26/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed the Revenue's appeal against the Tribunal's allowance of Cenvat credit on packed goods. It held that credit is available if duty was paid on the packing material, even if not received separately. The reduction in penalty was also sustained.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed; Cenvat credit allowed; Penalty reduction sustained.

Commissioner of Central Excise, Jalandhar… — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

CEA No.26 of 2009

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CEA No.26 of 2009

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: February 18, 2010

¶6

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, COMMISSIONERARE JALANDHAR

¶7

...APPELLANT

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/S INTERNATIONAL TRACTORS LTD. VILLAGE CHAK GUJRAN, HOSHIARPUR

¶10

...RESPONDENT

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR.

¶12

PRESENT: MR. KAMAL SEHGAL, SR.STANDING COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT. NONE FOR THE RESPONDENT.

¶13

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.(ORAL)

¶14

The Revenue has impugned the order dated 14.7.2008, (Annexure P-3) passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short 'the Tribunal'), vide which the respondent has been allowed Modvat credit on the packing material used by them in packing the spare-parts of tractors.

¶15

The respondent is manufacturer of tractors and tractor components falling under Chapter 87 & 84 of the First Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The components manufactured by the respondent are duly packed in boxes and thereafter are sold. The Tribunal has allowed credit of Rs.6.25 lacs on the goods of full packing of boxes. It has been observed by the Tribunal that duty was paid on the boxes.

¶16

CEA No.26 of 2009

¶17

-2-

¶18

This Court while admitting the appeal framed the following questions of law:-

¶19

“ (1) Whether the Hon'ble CESTAT can allow availment of Cenvat credit in respect of duty paid packing material which was not received by the Respondent alongwith the inputs?

¶20

(2) Whether the Hon'ble CESTAT is right in reducing the penalty to Rs.20,000/- whereas Section 11AC of the Act mandates equal penalty? ”

¶21

Mr. Kamal Sehgal, counsel for the Revenue has argued that the respondent never received inputs in the packing of boxes and infact the goods were delivered to the respondent in pallets and hence, the respondent was not entitled to any credit.

¶22

A perusal of the impugned order passed by the Tribunal shows that duty was paid by the suppliers on the goods inclusive of full packing of boxes. As duty was paid, hence the respondent was entitled to claim modvat credit on the packing material. It is not case where the duty was payable, but infact the duty had not been paid. As the duty was paid on the packing material, therefore, the respondent was entitled to claim Modvat credit.

¶23

In view of the above, it is held that CESTAT could allow availment of Cenvat credit in respect of duty paid on the packing material. This question is accordingly answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.

¶24

The Tribunal was right in reducing the penalty and this question is also answered against the Revenue.

¶25

CEA No.26 of 2009

¶26

-3-

¶27

Resultantly, the appeal is dismissed being devoid of merits.

¶28

(ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA) JUDGE

¶29

February 18, 2010 (MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR) Gulati JUDGE

Commissioner of Central Excise, Jalandhar v. M/S International Tractors Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Commissioner of Central Excise, Jalandhar v. M/S International Tractors Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Commr. of Central Excise, Chd. Vs M/S Sunshine Steel Corp.

The Comnr., Central Excise, Faridabad Vs M/S Rajdoot Cables Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.

Commr. Central Excise Commissionerate Ld Vs M/S Malwa Cotton Spinning Mills Ltd.

M/S National Engineering Corp. Faridabad Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Faridabad

C I T Vs Neena Jain

M/S Pawan Goods Freight Carrier Vs State of Punjab