9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (3) TMI 1024X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ased one Glass Plunger (Die) and availed the modvat credit amounting to ₹ 2,31,000/- on it in their RG 23C Part-II account on 10.10.97. This Die was sent to their Job Worker in terms of the provisions of Rule 57S(8). They were issued a show cause notice by the Dy. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur calling upon them why the above amount of modvat credit should not be denied to them under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... JDR for the respondents. It is observed form the orders of the original as well as appellate authorities that the modvat credit of duty on the impugned die sent by the appellants to the job worker has been denied to them for violation of the provisions of Rule 57S(8). This rule as it stood at the relevant time is extracted below: "(8) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (1), a m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n be considered as a "job worker" are not satisfied in the present case therefore, the facility under this rule cannot be extended to the appellants. The ld. Advocate for the appellants relied on the decision of the Tribunal in Final Order No.A/315/2000/NB(DB) dt. 5.4.2000 in the case of M/s. Monica Electronics vs. CCE New Delhi, in which the appeal of the party was allowed on the same g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the job worker. Therefore, if the Department had felt it necessary that in order to avil the facility under this rule, the raw material should also be supplied by the appellants to the job worker, the same should have been made as one of the conditions of the permission granted to them. The reliance placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court also prima facie appears mis-conceived sin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
