Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2013 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (4) TMI 302 - HC - Central ExciseCenvat Credit - Job work - It was the case of the Department that the inputs were not sent for job work. The parties to whom they were sent had paid duty on the manufacture, which should have been reversed by the appellant. On the other hand, it was the submission of the assessee that no revenue loss had actually occurred. The job worker added some additional material, and paid duty again, which was already paid by the appellant, and therefore, the appellant had no alternative but to take credit of the same in the books of account, else, it would have resulted in excess payment. According to the assessee, the credit taken was nothing but in respect of what was actually paid. Held that –In the case of Division Bench of this Court of Commissioner of Central Excise vs. M/s. Rohan Dyes and Intermediates Limited [2007 (3) TMI 651 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD] and Apex Court in M/s. International Auto Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bihar [2010 (1) TMI 151 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] If we apply the aforesaid principle to the facts of the present case, there is no dispute that according to the modvat scheme, it is the modvat of such final product which would have to include the cost of the inputs and in respect of which modvat credit could be taken at the time of clearance of the final product and thus, in the facts of the present case, the Tribunal rightly rejected the contention of the Revenue that the respondents should have reversed the cenvat credit taken before sending the goods to the job worker since the job worker had not followed the procedure of job work. Decision against the Department.
|