TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 183X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 10 (2) TMI 846 - CESTAT, MUMBAI]. In the decision of the Tribunal in the Crompton Greaves Ltd. vs. CCE, Mumbai III [2007 (1) TMI 353 - CESTAT, MUMBAI] it has also been categorically held that Rule 16 does not prescribe any time limit within which the goods are required to be cleared. It is also pertinent to mention that at the time of visit of the Central Excise officers to the factory, the goods were found within the factory. It is also on record that subsequently the goods stand cleared from the factory and the credit availed have already been reversed. Also intimation in Format D-3 stand filed by the appellant on receipt of each of these machines. Consequently the show cause notice issued by Revenue on 04/7/2013 for credits taken during ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7; 13,95,789/- under Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules readwith Section 11A (4) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order passed by the Original Authority and hence appeal has been filed before the Tribunal. 2. The impugned order has been challenged on the ground that Rule 16 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 allows Cenvat credit of the duty paid on goods which are brought to the factory for being remade, refined, reconditioned or for any other reason . The Cenvat credit availed by them would be covered under the term for any other reason . They have also submitted that at the time of receipt of each of those machines, due intimation was filed to the Department in the prescribed format D-3. Accordingly, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gular. He also cited the case of High Court of Madras in Automotive Coaches Components Ltd. vs. CCE, Puducherry reported in 2015 (325) E.L.T. 842 (Mad.) and argued that in as much as the goods were imported by the appellant s trading unit with the documents also in the name of the trading unit, the credit availed by the appellant is irregular. He also placed on Kalyani Forge Limited vs. CCE, Pune III reported in 2007 (211) E.L.T. 129 (Tri. Mumbai). 6. I have heard both the sides and perused the appeal records. 7. For ready reference I reproduced below the relevant provision of Rule 16 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 :- Rule 16. Credit of duty on goods brought to the factory (1) Where any goods on which duty had been paid at t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat when the goods are subject to a process of manufacture in the factory, at the time of clearance, the Central Excise duty due on such manufactured goods should be paid. In case the goods are not subject to a process of manufacture, then at the time of clearance, the Cenvat credit availed on such goods should be reversed. The allegation in this case is that the goods have been brought back to the factory of the appellant but have not been subject to any process whatsoever for a very long time. The reasons cited by the appellant for return of such goods is either brought back for repair or returned after exhibition outside the factory. I am of the view that such reasons will be covered by the expression for any other reason . My views find ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
