Commissioner of Central Excise vs Reliance Industries Ltd.

The Tribunal''s order dated 19th June, 2013, is challenged by the Revenue in these appeals. The issue was whether the show cause-cum-demand notice could have been issued after a period of one year was over and within the meaning of clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

The Tribunal found that the show cause notice, copy of which is at annexure A, was issued to the assessee. That bears the date of issuance as 15th October, 2010. It was received by the assessee on 22nd October, 2010. An order in original was passed on 6th February, 2012 against the assessee and which was impugned before the Tribunal.

The assessee''s counsel raised an issue of limitation. The argument was that the period which the show cause notice covers is from 2008-2009 and 2009-2010. That is wrongful availing of credit of duty paid on inputs and in terms of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. If the extended period and as stipulated in sub-section (1) of section 11A has to be invoked, then the Tribunal was required to be satisfied whether the duty of excise has to be levied or paid or has been short levied or short-paid or erroneously refunded by reason of fraud or collusion or any willful misstatement or suppression of facts or contravention of any provision of the Excise Act or Rules made thereunder with intent to evade payment of duty.

After hearing both sides, the Tribunal rendered a finding of fact that this extended period of limitation was not available to the Revenue. The assessee established before the Tribunal that they were declaring as an annexure to their central excise returns filed monthly, the details of availment of cenvat credit on the items in question viz. MS angles, MS flat bar, MS sheet / plate, beam/column, structural fleet, fabricated items etc. When such returns were forwarded, on one occasion query was raised by the Revenue / department in writing. That query raised contained in the letter dated 27th May, 2009, was replied by the assessee on 17th June, 2009. The reply letter of the assessee has been specifically received by the Revenue and acknowledgement thereof is produced in evidence. The receipt was acknowledged on 19th of June, 2009.

Therefore, in paragraph 8 of the impugned order, the Tribunal concluded that the availment of cenvat credit on the above items was to the knowledge of the department on 19th June, 2009. The show cause notice issued in the month of October, 2010 and to be precise, received on 22nd October, 2010, thus cannot be sustained. None of the ingredients and particularly the one alleged viz. suppression can be held to be established and proved. On such finding of fact, the Tribunal concluded that the demand on the Revenue is time barred.

These findings of fact and particularly rendered in the backdrop of the admitted factual position would thus raise no substantial questions of law. The Tribunal''s order cannot be termed as perverse or vitiated by any error of law apparent on the face of the record. Consequently, each of these appeals are dismissed but without any order as to costs.