9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (8) TMI 154X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts lying in stock "under protest". The adjudicating authority rejected the said refund claim on the ground that the duty on the products paid by the assessee "under protest" was being challenged by the assessee in CESTAT and the classification was decided in favour of the appellant, as "exempted" from the very beginning and hence, the reversal of the credit taken on inputs lying in stock was correct and the refund of such credit is inadmissible. For this the adjudicating authority has also held that the amount of duty paid has been reimbursed by the principal manufacturer M/s. Pfizer India Ltd. The appellate authority on an appeal has also held order-in-original to be correct on identical ground. 3. Ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isputed that the appellant was manufacturing the "feed supplements" in which duty paid inputs are used, as a job worker for the principal manufacturer i.e. M/s. Pfizer India Ltd., used to supply the duty paid inputs to the appellants. The classification of the "feed supplements" under Chapter 30, as dutiable product, was disputed by the appellant right from the beginning and the matter had to be settled by the Tribunal vide order dated 9-5-2000 [2000 (121) E.L.T. 203 (Tri.)] as to that the feed supplements being exempted from payment of duty. It is a fact and admitted position that the appellant had on the directions of the Superintendent of Central Excise reversed the Cenvat credit on the inputs lying in stock as on 27-5-2000 "under protes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decision of the Ashok Iron & Steel Fabricators. Further, it is on record that the appellants had in fact in the agreement with the principal manufacturer categorically cast liabilities on account of payment of excise entirely on M/s. Pfizer India Ltd., and there is a also clause to the effect, that in the event of any accrual of liabilities in terms of money or otherwise the same shall be reimbursed by M/s. Pfizer India Ltd., in one lump sum amount without any indemnity or reservation. Therefore, on the face of such a clause in the agreement between the appellants and the principal manufacturer, it would be difficult to come to a conclusion that the appellants had not collected the amount reversed by them, from the principal manufacturer. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
