Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2019 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (2) TMI 72 - CESTAT CHENNAIProcess amounting to Manufacture or not - clutch assemblies received from their Unit-I - main allegation of the department is that clutch assemblies received from their Unit-I did not undergo any manufacturing activities such as packing / repacking, labelling / relabeling, affixing of new M.R.P rates - principles of natural justice - Held that:- The adjudicating authority has not addressed or analysed the data supplied by the appellants. The adjudicating authority has also not addressed the claim of the appellants that wherever there has been no “deemed manufacture” as per Section 2f (3) of the Act, they have reversed the credit in terms of Rule 3 (5) of CCR and that for export clearances they are not required to reverse the credit availed by them at the input stage. While the appellants have given the data as mentioned above, it is not clear therefrom as to what quantum of goods were subjected to processes amounting to “deemed manufacture” and / or on which M.R.P was revised upwards resulting in discharge of differential duty liability. So also, the data with regard to clearances of inputs as such by reversing cenvat credit availed thereon under Rule 3 (5) ibid has also not been separately indicated. While the adjudicating authority has not adequately addressed the various contentions and submissions of the appellant made by the appellant during the adjudication proceedings, the appellant themselves have not submitted clear break up each type of removals of the goods received by them from Unit-I. So also, while appellants have submitted information in respect of credit reversed due to export, no details have been given with regard to value or quantum of exports concerned and the datas of such export - the matter requires to be remanded to the adjudicating authority for de novo consideration. Penalty - Held that:- The entire dispute pertains to interpretation of the provisions relating to “deemed manufacture” and in particular, the eligibility to avail cenvat credit on goods - also appellants have consistently provided all the necessary details to the department as and when called for including reply dt. 13.10.2011 in response to audit party’s queries dt. 6.9.2011 - penalty not warranted and is set aside. Appeal allowed in part and part matter on remand.
|