Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2013 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (9) TMI 380 - CESTAT MUMBAIValuation - Job Work - The principal-manufacturer supplied the raw material on payment of duty which had been taken credit of by the job-worker - the job-worker thereafter undertakes the job-work and returns the same to the principal-manufacturer on payment of appropriate duty - Held that:- Scrap value was liable to be added in the value of the job-worked product which had been returned to the principal-manufacturer on payment of duty - The job-worker was retaining the scrap and selling the scrap and retaining the sale proceeds of such scrap with himself - It was unimaginable that a job-worker would not have taken into account the value of the scrap that he can retain while quoting his job-charges - Similarly, the principal-manufacturer while negotiating the job-work charges obviously would have taken into account the cost of scrap that the job-worker was entitled to retain and sell - Normal business prudence would compel both the principal-manufacturer and the job-worker to take into account the value of the scrap that will be retained by the job-worker which can be sold by him – Following GENERAL ENGINEERING WORKS Versus COMMR. OF C. EX., JAIPUR [2005 (3) TMI 16 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA]. Revenue Neutrality – Held that:- The job-worker and the principal-manufacturer were separate, distinct and different legal entities and, therefore, mere availability of credit to the principal-manufacturer cannot be said to have led to a revenue neutral situation - The principal-manufacturer can take the credit of the duty paid by the job-worker, such an argument was devoid of merits - Revenue neutrality situation will arise only if the job-working unit and the principal manufacturing unit belong to the same organization. Jay Yuhshin Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi [2000 (7) TMI 105 - CEGAT, COURT NO. I, NEW DELHI ] - revenue neutrality being a question of fact, the same had to be established in the facts of each case and not merely by showing the availability of an alternative scheme - where the scheme opted for by the assessee was found to have been misused, the existence of an alternate scheme would not be an acceptable defence and with particular reference to MODVAT scheme it had to be shown that the revenue neutral situation comes about in relation to the credit available to the assessee himself and not by way of availability of credit to the buyer of the assessee’s manufactured goods. Extended Period of Time - Waiver of Pre-deposit - Whether the Revenue could have invoked extended period time to confirm the duty demand - Held that:- This would depend on the evidence available on record and would require detailed examination which can be done only at the time of final hearing and disposal of the case - The appellants had not made out a case for complete waiver of the pre-deposit of the dues - they were required to make pre-deposit of the demand of duty within the normal period of limitation - Decided against Assessee.
|