Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *   CBIC issues draft rules for Customs valuation *  Top Headlines: Threshold for Benami deals, green bond investors, and more *  Govt aims 1-hour clearance for goods at all ports *  Exporters Allowed To Use RoDTEP, RoSCTL Scrips To Pay Customs Duty, Transfer Them; Rules Amended *  Millions of labourers to be affected by brick producers’ strike over hike in GST, coal rates *  Inauguration of ‘kendriya GST parisar’ *  Transporter can seek Release of Conveyance alone, not Goods under GST Act: Madras HC *  GST: Quoting of DIN Mandatory for Responding to Notice, Govt Modifies Portal *  Firms can soon file claims for GST credits of ?400 cr *  CBIC issues modalities for filing transitional credit under GST. *  Mumbai: Man creates 36 fake GST firms, arrested for input tax credit fraud of Rs 23 cr *  Report to restructure Commerce Ministry under study; idea is to set up trade promotion body: Goyal *  Firms can soon file claims for GST credits of ?400 cr *  Gambling Alert! Govt May Levy Up To 28% GST; UP, Bengal Back Move *  EPFO backs raising retirement age to ease pressure on pension funds *  India Moving Up Power Scale, Set to Become Third Largest Economy By 2030 *  Airfares Get Expensive: What Changes for Flyers From Today? *  IRCTC Latest News: Passengers to Pay More For Cancelling Confirmed Rail Tickets Soon. *  IBC prevails over Customs Act, says Supreme Court. *  As GST enters sixth year, a time for evaluation and reassessment *  There’s GST on daily essentials as Centre needs money to buy MLAs: Arvind Kejriwal *  Now, GST on cancellation of confirmed train tickets, hotel bookings *  GST kitty for top States could rise 20% in FY23, says Crisil *  French customs officials seize another cargo vessel over Russia sanctions *  TradeLens builds on Asia momentum with Pakistan Customs deal *  Hike tax on tobacco, reduce affordability & increase revenue: Civil society organizations to GST council *  Bihar: ?10 crore tax evasion on tobacco products detected in raids *  Centre failed on GST, COVID; would it be anti-national? Rajan on Infosys row *  Service Tax not Chargeable on Income Tax TDS portion paid by recipient: CESTAT grants relief to TVS *  Foreign portfolio investors make net investment of Rs 7575cr in Sep so far
Subject News *  Run-up to Budget: Monetary threshold for GST offences may rise to Rs 25 cr *   GST (Tax) E-invoice Must For Businesses With Over Rs 5 Crore Annual Turnover *   Both Central GST and excise duty can be imposed on tobacco, rules Karnataka high court *   CBIC Issues Clarification On Extended Timelines For GST Compliance *   CBIC Issues Clarification On Extended Timelines For GST Compliance *  Budget 2023- 9.6 crore gas connections *  GST: Tamil Nadu Issues Instructions for Assessment and Adjudication Proceedings *  GST: CBIC Extends Last Date for filing of ITC *  GST collection in September surpasses Rs 1.4 lakh crore for straight seventh time *  Dollar smuggling case: Customs chargesheet names M Sivasankar as key conspirator. *  Hike in GST rates fuels inflation *  Assam: CBI arrests GST commissioner in Guwahati *  GST fraud worth ?824cr by 15 insurance Cos detected *  India proposes 15% customs duties on 22 items imported from UK *  Decriminalising certain offences under GST on cards *  Surge in GST collections more due to higher inflation: India Ratings *  MNRE Notifies BCD and Hike in GST Rates as ‘Change in Law’ Events But With a Condition | Mercom India *   Solar projects awarded before customs duty change allowed cost pass-through *  Rajasthan High Court Dismisses Writ Petitions Challenging Levy Of GST On Royalty *   GST revenue in September likely at Rs 1.45 lakh crore *  Govt working on decriminalising certain offences under GST, lower compounding charge *  Building an institution like GST Council takes time, trashing is easy: Sitharaman *  GST collections in Sept may touch ?1.5 lakh crore *  KTR asks Centre to withdraw GST on handlooms *  After Gameskraft, More Online Gaming Startups To Receive GST Tax Claims *  Madras HC: AAR Application Filed Under VAT Does Not Survive After GST Enactment *  Threshold for criminal offences under GST law may be raised *  Bengaluru: Gaming company faces biggest GST notice of Rs 21,000 crore *  CBIC clarifies Classification of Cranes for GST, Customs Duty *  Customs seize gold hidden in bicycle in Kerala airport  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Laws/2011-12/1479

Cenvat Credit on capital Goods purchased under Financial loan agreement with Bank

Case: LUMBINI BEVERAGES PVT.LTD Vs COMMISSIONER OF C. EX, PATNA
 
Citation: 2011 (273) E.L.T. 224 (PAT)
 
Issue:- Cenvat Credit on Capital Goods – admissibility of – whether procedure provided under Rule 57R(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was required to be followed irrespective of whether assessee is owner of Capital Goods?   
 
Brief Fact:- The Appellant Lumbini Beverages Private Limited purchased capital goods from indigenous manufacturer/suppliers. In these purchases, invoices were in the Assessee's name. Assessee also imported capital goods from foreign countries and got those cleared from the customs by filing bills of entry and paying the duties thereon. The assessee availed Modvat credits of Central Excise duties paid on the indigenous capital good and countervailing (additional) duties paid on the imported capital goods. The total Modvat credit taken by the assessee on the said capital goods is to the extent of Rs. 68,27,831,24/-. A show cause notice was issued to the assessee, inter alia, alleging that the aforesaid credits were taken without satisfying the procedure provided under Rule 57R(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and the assessee was required to show cause as to why the said credits be not disallowed. Assessee filed its reply, inter alia, contending that all the capital goods in question were directly purchased or imported by it on principal to principal basis and were not acquired by it on lease, hire-purchase or loan agreement nor these were acquired by any financing company and it being the owner of the said goods the procedure under Rule 57R (3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules') is not required to be followed. The Deputy Commissioner rejected his submission and disallowed the Modvat credits, Aggrieved by the same, the assessee filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs and Central Excise, Patna, who allowed the appeal, inter alia, observing that the assessee is the owner of the capital goods and being so the procedure of Rule 57R (3) of the Rules was not required to be complied with. It also held that IDBI and IIBI are not covered by the expression "financing company" as used in Rule 57R (3) of the Rules. The Commissioner of Central Excise, aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) in so far as it relates to the Modvat credit of Rs. 68, 27,831.24/-, filed appeal before the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, which accepted its plea that the procedure laid down in Rule 57R(3) of the Rules is required to be followed irrespective of the ownership of the goods. It further observed that since the assessee had taken the loans from IDBI and JIB!, which are covered by the expression "financing company" as used in Rule 57R(3) of the Rules and accordingly, set aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals).Assessee thereafter has preferred this application under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
 
Questions referred are as under:
 
1. Whether on a true and correct interpretation of the provision relating to allow ability of Modvat credit on capital goods, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the procedure under Rule 57R(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 has to be followed irrespective of as to whether the assessee is the owner of the goods?
 
2. Whether the procedure under Rule 57R(3) has to be followed in a case where the assessee directly and in its own name purchases the capital goods from the manufacturers/suppliers thereof and also pays for the same simply because a general financial loan agreement was entered into between the assessee and the banks?"
 
Appellant’s Contention:- The Appellant submits that the assessee is the owner of the capital goods and, as such, procedure as required under Rule 57R(3) of the Rules is not required to be followed. According to him, capital goods have not been acquired by the assessee on lease, hire-purchase or loan agreement from a financing company, but under a loan agreement from the bank, money has been used for the purchase of the capital goods and those capital goods have been hypothecated to the bank. According to him, in case of loan agreement, the financing company would be the owner and the term agreement with the banks is not with specific reference to the capital goods. To support his contention that in case of hypothecation of the capital goods, assessee shall not be ceased to be the owner of the capital goods and, as such, the provisions of Rule 57R(3) of the Rules shall not be attracted, placed reliance on a judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Bank of Baroda, Ahmedabad v. Rabari Bachubhai Hirabhai and Others [AIR 1987 Gujarat 1] and our attention has been drawn to the following passage from paragraph 6 of the said judgment, which reads as follows : "The hypothecating Bank, a creditor, had merely advanced a loan against the security of that vehicle and had a special right to recover its dues in the event of default by, if need be, the sale of the vehicle. It had, therefore, no title over the vehicle. It was not even in constructive possession of the vehicle but it had merely a right to recover its dues by the sale of that vehicle. So long as there was no default in the payment of the loan amount, it could not exercise that special right to sell the vehicle for realization of its dues. Under the circumstances, we feel that the view taken by the Claims Tribunal is contrary to law and ignores the elementary fact that under the agreement of hypothecation neither the title in the property nor the possession thereof stands transferred to the creditor Bank. The Claims Tribunal has betryed total non-application of mind as regards the jural relationship which comes into existence on the hypothecation of the vehicle for securing the debt. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the Claims Tribunal committed a gross error in law in holding that the hypothecating Bank had stepped into the shoes of the owners for having advanced a loan against the security of the vehicle in question." To drive home his point, Appellant states that hypothecation is the pledging of something as security without delivery of title or possession.
 
Respondent’s Contention:-  The Commissioner of Central Excise, Patna (hereinafter referred to as the 'revenue') submits that the provisions of Rule 57R(3) of the Rules shall be attracted in case the capital goods have been brought under a financial arrangement for financing the cost of the same.
 
Reasoning of Judgment:- It is not the dispute that the Assessee has entered into the financial arrangement with the bank for financing the cost of capitals goods.  In the opinion of  High Court of Jurdicature  at patna  hypothecation of machine does not change the ownership of Capital goods  to the lender in as much hypothecation is only security  for repayment of loan  within a time frame. When the loan is not returned within the time stipulated, the ownership is transferred from the borrower to the lender in case the clause of Agreement so provides. Rule 57 (3) (II) (A) of the Rules require the manufacture availing credit of duty paid on the Capital goods, who has entered into financial arrangement, for financing the cost of such capital goods to produce a copy of the invoice evidencing of payment of specified duty along with the copy of the agreement entered by it with the financing company.
 
Further Rule 57R (3)(II) (B) of the Rules require production of certificate from the financing company  to the effect that the duties specified on such capital goods  have been paid by the manufacturer to the  such financing company prior to the payment of  first instalments of repayment of loan
 
Accordingly the provision of Rule 57R (3) of the Rules is required to be even when the capital goods were acquired by the assessee under the loan agreement from the bank & it was held that Tribunal in fact & circumstances of the case is correct in law in holding that the procedure under Rule 57R(3) of the Rules is required to be followed. Now referring to the decision of Gujarat High Court in the case of Rabari Bachubhai Hirabhai (supra), same has no bearing in the fact & circumstances of the case. In this case the question before the court as to whether the hypothecating bank, a creditor of the owner of the vehicle had or de facto possession or title over the vehicle and it has been held that the bank can only recovers its dues, in the event of default, by sale of the vehicle and the bank can never be taken to steps into the shoes of the owner & consequently not liable to pay compensation to the victims of the accident caused by the owner Here in the present case  the High Court  are not concerned with the liability of the  bank to the payment of compensation  under the Motor Vehicles and as such, the decision relied on has no bearing in the fact & circumstances of the case. The answer to the second question has also to be rendered in favour of the revenue and against the assessee that in the view of the financial loan agreement between the assessee and the bank, assessee was required to follows  the procedure  under Rule 57R(3) of the Rules. Reference is answered in favour of revenue.
 
Decision:-  Appeal disposed off. 

Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com