TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 601X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taken by the Department are contrary to each other. If the Department alleges that the inputs were not received in the factory and leads evidence in this regard, then there was no need to make an allegation that after receipt of the inputs in the factory, the inputs then subjected to certain processes do not result into manufacture as defined under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Assailing the stand of the Department that the inputs have not been received in the factory, the learned advocate for the appellant furnished data relating to activity of manufacture carried out by them i.e. amounts spent on electricity consumption, fuel consumption, factory overheads etc., which indicate that processes on the inputs were undertake ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ective Orders-in-Original. Since the issue involved is common, the appeals are taken up together for hearing and disposal. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant are engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods falling under Chapter Heading 8544 of CETA, 1985. The appellant imported the inputs viz. 7/8 Radio Frequency (RF) Cables on payment of appropriate applicable customs duties on the same. The said inputs are processed and converted into two types viz. Jumper Cables and RF Feeder Cables. They have availed and utilised cenvat credit on various duties paid at the time of import, which were later utilised in the clearance of the finished goods, after carrying out the process like connectorising, testing, repacki ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he transaction value determined under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act. They have filed periodical monthly returns viz. ER-1 with jurisdictional Central Excise authorities showing the clearances on payment of duty. Consequent to the audit of their records between February 2007 to May 2007, it was opined that the cables imported by the appellant on which they availed credit was not an input as no activity of manufacturing carried out on the said imported items. Later, statements of the General Manager was taken and also of two transporters viz. M/s. Vishnu Roadways Logistics Services and M/s. Dhawan Roadways Services. The allegation of the Department was that the inputs were not received inside the factory and secondly, assuming that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of goods and also incurred expenditure towards electricity consumption, fuel consumption, factory overheads, salaries and wages paid to workers and employees, claimed depreciation on plant machinery. All these evidences though produced before the authorities below, the same were not considered and discarded. He has submitted that once the Department has accepted the duty on the final products considering the fact that the inputs processed resulted into dutiable product later, the Department cannot be allowed to deny cenvat credit on the inputs alleging the processes carried out not amount to manufacture. In support, he has referred to the judgment of this Tribunal and High Courts, particularly the judgment of Hon ble Karnataka High Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ata relating to activity of manufacture carried out by them i.e. amounts spent on electricity consumption, fuel consumption, factory overheads etc., which indicate that processes on the inputs were undertaken in their factory premises after the inputs brought into their factory. Also, the statements of two transporters relied upon by the learned Commissioner do not inspire confidence inasmuch as further investigation was not carried out by the Department and the transporters have not categorically claimed to have not transported the goods during the period they have employed by the appellant. Besides, the statements of two transporters among 13 to 14 transporters cannot be generalised and made applicable to the entire period. In these circu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the Revenue. The said principle later followed by the Hon ble Karnataka High Court in Vishal Precision Steel Tubes and Stripes Pvt. Ltd. case. Their Lordships at para 7 observed as follows:- 7. It is an undisputed position that the final product is treated as dutiable and duty is paid by the assessee. When once duty is paid by the assessee treating the activity as manufacturing activity by the Department, Cenvat credit is available and there is no question of reversion of Cenvat credit. As such, in view of the aforesaid two decisions of the High Court namely, Bombay High Court and Gujarat High Court, we do not find any question of law would arise for consideration as sought to be canvassed. 7. In view of the settled pri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
