Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2015 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (11) TMI 458 - CESTAT MUMBAIJob work - Valuation - whether the value of the jobwork undertaken by the appellant for Swojas is liable to be included in the value of clearances made by the appellant and deny him the benefit of Notification No.1/93 holding appellant as manufacturer - Held that:- appellant is manufacturer of various dairy equipments and claims benefit of small scale exemption No. 1/93 and also undertakes jobwork. It is seen from the records and more specifically the undertaking given by the Swojas to the jurisdictional authorities having jurisdiction over their office that they wished to get the dairy equipments manufactured on jobwork basis from the appellant herein. We specifically find that the said Swojas has informed and requested the Asst. Collector to forward one of the undertakings to the jurisdictional authorities of the appellants factory. Further we find that they had given a clear undertaking that any duty liability that arises on the dairy equipments manufactured as job work by the appellant, will be discharged by Swojas. On such categorical declaration and undertaking given by Swojas no demand is raised on Swojas. We find that the provisions of Notification No.84/94 are clear when read indicates that if any duty liability that arises on the goods manufactured on job work basis under the said Notification, is to be demanded from the supplier of the raw material. In the case in hand, the supplier of the raw material is Swojas and the demand of duty if any, should have been made on them and not on the appellant. The provisions of the said Notification are very clear to that extent and Revenue authorities were in error in demanding the Central Excise duty from the appellant. - impugned order is set aside - decided in favour of assessee,
|