9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (9) TMI 442X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 15(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 along with interest at applicable rate. 2. Brief facts of the case are that M/s. Bajaj Auto Ltd., the appellant, are the manufacturer of the Motor Cycles, rickshaws and spares thereof. They are also availing the facility of Cenvat credit of the duty paid on the specified inputs received in their factory premises in terms of the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The appellants are procuring these specified inputs from various manufacturers against contractual agreements namely purchase orders for the agreed prices/values. 3. On scrutiny of records maintained for the purpose of availing Cenvat credit reveals that the appellant have availed the full cre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Section 4(1) of the CEA, 1944 and the appellants have lawfully availed the Cenvat Credit of the excise duty so paid within the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. He further submits that it is well settled principle that the duty is chargeable at the rate and price when the commodity is cleared at the factory gate and not on the price reduced at a subsequent date. To support this contention he relied on MRF Ltd. v. CCE, Madras reported in 1997 (92) E.L.T. 309 (S.C.) He further submitted that in the instant case it is an admitted fact that they have raised debit notes for the rate reduction, subsequent to clearances of goods by the suppliers from their factories. It is pertinent to note that the assessment of the said goods was final ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid. 6. We have heard submissions made by both the parties and we take note that the appellants have availed Cenvat credit of the actual duty paid on the inputs at the time of clearance of the goods of their supplier and the contention of Shri P.K. Agarwal, ld. SDR is not acceptable as the supplier has assessed the value of the goods at their end and paid accordingly. If there is any differential duty then it is the burden on the department to re-assess the duty payable which exercise has not been done by the Jurisdictional range of suppliers end. In these circumstances the appellants have rightly claimed the Cenvat credit on the actual duty paid. There is no provision in the Cenvat Credit Rules that the appellants are not entitled to take ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
