Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Renu Engineering Industries Versus Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Daman

2016 (1) TMI 381 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

Denial of refund claim - job worker and erroneously paid duty on clearance of job work material - Held that:- CENVAT Credit shall be allowed even if inputs or capital goods sent to job worker for further processing, testing, repair etc. for the manufacture of intermediate goods necessary for the manufacture of final product, and it is established from the records that the goods are received back in the factory within the stipulated period. So, Rule 4(5)(a) of the Rules permitted the manufacturer .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nt were admittedly not used in the manufacture of final product viz. pharmaceuticals or chemicals. - decided against Assessee. - Appeal No.E/260/2012 - Order No. A/11405/2015 - Dated:- 9-10-2015 - MR. P.K. DAS, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) For the Appellant: Shri Prasad Paranjape, Advocate For the Respondent: Shri T.K. Sikdar, Authorised Representative ORDER Per: P.K. Das The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the Appellants were engaged in the manufacture of Machinery classifiable under Chapte .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

aid duty on clearance of job work material. The Adjudicating authority rejected the refund claim, which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). 2. The learned Advocate on behalf of the Appellant submits that the Appellants received the material under the challan issued under Rule 4(5)(a) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and after due process returned the goods to the principal for use as capital goods within their factory. So, no duty is payable on the job work material cleared to the principa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

h Industries Ltd Vs CCE Ahmedabad 2009 (238) ELT 203 (Tri-Ahmd) ii) M.Tex & D.K. Processors (P) Ltd Vs CCE Jaipur 2001 (136) ELT 73 (Tri-Del), upheld by HSC as reported in 2002 (146) ELT A 309. 3. The learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue reiterates the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). He submits that the Rule 4(5)(a) particularly provides that the goods will be used in the manufacture of final product. In the present case, the goods were not used in the manufacture of fin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The relevant portion of the said Rule 4(5)(a) is reproduced below:- (5)(a) The CENVAT credit shall be allowed even if any inputs or capital goods as such or after being partially processed are sent to a job worker for further processing, testing, repair, re-conditioning (or for the manufacture of intermediate goods necessary for the manufacture of final products) or any other purpose, and it is established from the records, challans or memos or any other document pr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r or provider of output service can take the CENVAT credit again when the inputs or capital goods are received back in his factory or in the premises of the provider of output service. 5. On a plain reading of Rule 4(5)(a) of the said Rules, it is clear that the CENVAT Credit shall be allowed even if inputs or capital goods sent to job worker for further processing, testing, repair etc. for the manufacture of intermediate goods necessary for the manufacture of final product, and it is establishe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

for the manufacture of final product by the principal, as it is engaged in the manufacture of Pharmaceuticals or Chemicals. The Appellant received the Iron and Steel articles and manufactured fermenters/columns on job work basis which were not used in the manufacture of pharmaceuticals or chemicals. Apparently, it is evident from the records that the job work material were not used in the manufacture of final product of the principal and therefore, it is not covered under Rule 4(5)(a) of the sai .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version