Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2013 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (5) TMI 89 - AT - Central ExciseCenvat credit on furnace oil - denial of claim - assessee contested that oil which was used by them in the manufacture of goods on job work basis - Revenue appeal that Commissioner (Appeals) has erred by not confirming interest on wrong availment of Cenvat credit - Held that:- In cases of manufacturers like the Appellants the final product is the tractor. The intermediate product would be parts which are manufactured for being used in the tractor. In such a case the parts would not be the final product. Thus Rule 57C would have no application. The mere fact that the parts are cleared from one factory of the Appellants to another factory of the Appellants would not disentitle the Appellant from claiming benefit of Notification No. 217/86-C.E., dated 2nd April, 1986 which itself clarifies that the inputs can be used within the factory of production or in any other factory of the same manufacturer. By applying the ratio of Sterlite Industries (I) Limited vs. CCE, Pune [2004 (12) TMI 108 - CESTAT, MUMBAI] it becomes clear that Modvat credit of duty paid on the inputs used in the manufacture of final product cleared without payment of duty for further utilisation in the manufacture of final product, which are cleared on payment of duty by the principal manufacturer, would not be hit by provision of Rule 57C. Inasmuch as, the matter stands decided by the Honourable Supreme Court, we would hold in favour of assessee. Also see ESCORTS LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, DELHI [2004 (8) TMI 106 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] - In favour of assessee.
|