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 618 - CESTAT AHMEDABADAvailment of Cenvat Credit on input - Cenvat credit of central excise duty paid on the inputs viz. CHE zinc. The assessee herein directed the supplier of zinc to deliver the same to their job worker for conversion into alloy and availed Modvat credit at their end - Revenue were of the view that the assessee is not eligible to avail such Modvat credit as they are unable to evidence the receipt back of the goods from job worker – Held that:- Hon’ble CESTAT vide final order dated 19-4-2004 remanded the case to the original adjudicating authority for the limited aspect is to be examined the receipt of casting from the 2nd job worker - Accordingly, the assessee has submitted statements showing the quantity of the Zinc, Aluminum and Magnesium sent by the first job-worker M/s. Sun Metal Industries, Ahmedabad to the second job-worker M/s. Gujarat Die Casting Industries, Surat and also the statements showing the quantity of Castings received by them from the second job-worker M/s. Gujarat Die casting Industries, Surat during the period under reference. The statement indicates the supply of three ingredients separately by M/s. Sun Metal Industries, Ahmedabad, to the second job-worker M/s. Gujarat Die casting Industries, Surat, even though the final product is an alloyed product of Zinc, Aluminum and Magnesium. These statements only give the details of the movement of the inputs and semi-processed material from one job-worker to another and lastly to the assessee - Appellants had produced the documentary evidence in the form of delivery challans of receipt of the casting from the second job worker from M/s. Gujarat Die Casting Industries, Surat. The said delivery challans indicate the quantity dispatched to the Appellant – Decided in favor of Assessee. Interest on the amount of pre-deposit which were ordered by the Tribunal and the Commissioner (Appeals) for hearing and disposing their appeal – Held that:- Impugned orders in the earlier two rounds of litigation, were set aside by the Tribunal and the matter remanded back to the lower authorities would mean that the appellant is entitled for refund of the amounts which were ordered as pre-deposit. In this case, it is undisputed that an amount of Rs. 4,50,000/- was directed to be deposited by the higher judicial foras, for hearing and disposing the appeal, which eventually gone in assessee’s favour – Relying upon the judgment of the division bench of the Tribunal in the case of Goenka Woollen Mills Ltd. – [2011 (3) TMI 1136 - CESTAT, KOLKATA ], it was held that payment of interest when the claim was not settled within a period of 3 (three) months of the disposal of the appeal in the assessee’s favour – Revenue are liable to pay interest to the assessee-appellant in this case – Decided in favor of Assessee.
|