Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2016 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (12) TMI 1054 - CESTAT NEW DELHICENVAT credit - job work - inputs sent to job workers factory from the sellers premises - inputs not received back - Held that: - I find that originally the notice alleged denial of credit on the ground that the inputs were not received directly in the assessees factory and were sent to the job workers premise. There is no issue of non-receipt of goods back from the job worker factory within 180 days. When the attention of the authorities were drawn to the provisions of Rule 4(5)(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules which permit such sending of inputs to the job workers factory for processing, the Revenue shifted its stand and denied the credit on the ground that there is no evidence of receipt back of goods within a period of 180 days. When the above allegation was not the subject matter of the show cause notice, there is no requirement on the part of the assessee to produce the evidence to that effect. Further, the Commissioner (Appeals) by observing so, has travelled beyond the show cause notice, which is not permissible. As such, I am of the view that there being no such allegation of non-receipt of goods from the job worker, the denial of credit to the appellant is not justified. Apart from above that credit was availed by the appellant on 2010-2011 whereas show cause notice stands issued on 14.1.2013, by invoking the longer period of limitation. The credit was availed by the appellant by reflecting the same in statutory documents and there is no evidence of any positive suppression or misstatement on the part of the appellant reflecting upon any malafide on their part. As such, I am of the view that the demand is also barred by limitation. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|