9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 531X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t customers like TATA, HMT & Escorts Limited (Tractor Division). While the Crankshafts for TATA & HMT were being manufactured from billet stage i.e. first the billets are converted into forging and, thereafter, the forgings are subjected to machining for manufacture of fully finished Crankshafts, the Crankshafts for Escorts Ltd. were being manufactured out of rough castings received from them which were being subjected to the machining in the factory of the appellant. For manufacture of crankshafts for Escorts, M/s. Escorts Ltd. were sending duty paid inputs (rough castings), in respect of which they have availed cenvat credit, to the appellants under Job Work Challans under Rule 4(5)(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and the appellant af ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 11AB and imposition of penalty on the appellant under Section 11AC and penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 on M/s. Escorts. This show cause notice was adjudicated by the Commissioner, Central Excise, Noida vide Order-in-Original dated 25-3-2011 by which the duty demand of Rs. 1,98,12,707/- was confirmed against the Appellant along with interest and besides this, penalty of equal amount was imposed on them. Penalty of Rs. 25 Lakhs was also imposed on M/s. Escorts under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. Against this order of the Commissioner (Appeals), this appeal along with stay application has been filed by the appellant. 2. Heard both the sides in respect of stay application. 3. Shri R. Krishnan, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that is, M/s. Escorts Ltd. discharges duty liability on the goods cleared by the appellant to them or on the finished goods cleared by M/s. Escorts in the manufacture of which crankshafts have been used, that crankshafts cleared by the appellant to M/s. Escorts had been used in the manufacture of engines, which, in turn, were used by M/s. Escorts in the manufacture of tractors, that during the period of dispute when the tractors were fully exempt from duty, M/s. Escorts should have paid the duty on the engines but they have not discharged the duty liability on the engines and, therefore, on account of failure of M/s. Escorts to discharge the duty liability on the engines, the crankshafts manufactured by the appellant would not be exempt fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... harged duty on the engines. In view of this, exemption Notification No. 214/86-C.E. would no longer be available to the appellant in respect of crankshafts manufactured by them. 7. Therefore, we are of this view that on merits, the appellants do not have prima facie case in their favour. As regards limitation, the question as to whether the longer limitation period of 5 years under proviso to Section 11A(1) can be invoked, the same is a mixed question of law and the facts, which can be examined in detail only at the time of final hearing. We are, therefore, of the view that this is not a case for total waiver. The appellant are, therefore, directed to deposit 50% of the duty demand confirmed against them within a period of 4 wee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
