9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (4) TMI 431X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Ms. Neeta Lal Butalia, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : V.K. Agrawal, Member (T)]. - In this Appeal filed by M/s. Abhishek Auto Industries Ltd., the issue involved is whether they were eligible to take the Modvat credit of the duty paid by the job worker. 2. Shri J.P. Kaushik, learned Advocate, submitted that the Appellants manufacture safety seat belts and power windows, tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se its own material in substantial quantity to the inputs supplied by the Appellants, they were not eligible to remove the inputs under Rule 57F(4). The learned Advocate, further submitted that Rule 57F(4) does not anywhere provide that job worker can not add any material on its own or that job worker has not to pay the duty. Rule 57F is simply a provision of sending the inputs or partially proces ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entative, reiterated the findings as contained in the reply to the show cause notice and emphasized that the Appellants had already taken the Modvat credit of the duty paid on the inputs which were removed by them to the premises of job worker; that the job worker was not required to pay any duty and as such they can not take the Modvat credit of the duty paid by the job worker. 4. We have c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... worker has paid the duty, the Appellants who are the manufacturer of the final products, are eligible to take the credit of the duty paid by the job worker. It cannot be claimed by the Revenue that any prejudice has been caused to them by the act of the appellants in taking the Modvat credit of the duty paid by the job worker at the intermediary stage inasmuch as the Appellants had taken that much ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
