Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (12) TMI 268 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT credit on returned goods - Rule16 (1) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 - the appellant on the returned goods carried out the processes such as straightening, dimension checking heat treatment, lacquer quoting etc, whether theses process amounts to manufacture? - Held that: - it cannot be accepted that the appellant have carried out any other process such as galvanizing and redrawing of the pipe. In absence of these process whatever process carried out it does not amount to manufacture - in terms of Rule 16(2) of the Rule, the appellant on the process not being manufacture required to pay duty equivalent to the amount of cenvat credit availed at the time of receipt of returned goods. The process does not amount to manufacture, therefore the differential duty demand is sustainable - Since the issue of short payment of duty was raised by the audit party there is a clear suppression of fact on the part of the appellant as the fact that what credit was availed and whether the same was paid or otherwise, was not disclosed to the department - demand with interest and penalty upheld. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
|