9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1059X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s been represented by Shri S.P.Siddhanta, ld.Consultant and Revenue has been represented by Shri S.Mukhopadhyay, Supdt.(AR). 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Appellant has been bringing into factory H.R. Coils/Chequered Coil and cutting/slitting the same and the said process has been declared as not 'amounting to manufacture'. The Appellant was paying duty of Central Excise on the said product/goods and were also availing facility of CENVAT Credit. They were taking benefit of the facility provided under the provisions of Rule 16(1) and Rule 16(2) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 whereunder they were taking CENVAT Credit of the duty paid on such goods (H.R.Coils/Chequered Coils) brought into the factory under Rule 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cks Plant vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana [ 2011(271) ELT 396(Tri.-Del)] 4.1 Revenue's Circular No.607/44/2001-CX dated 13.12.2001 clarifies that the assessee would be entitled to the facility of Rule 16 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The said Circular in Paras 2 & 3 clarifies as below:- "2. The Board has examined the matter. The said Rule 16 provides for return of duty paid goods to the factory for being re-made, refined, reconditioned or for any other reason. It was in the context of the word return that the Central Excise Manual issued on 1-09-2001 states that goods should return to the same factory in which they were manufactured. However, Board observes that under erstwhile Rule 173H of Central Excise Rules 1944, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ling on the decoiled HR/CR coils, which is a complex technical process involving huge investment in plant and machinery. Since these additional activities were not considered by the Board in its Circular dated 7th September, 2001, the withdrawal of the said Circular cannot be a ground to hold that the activity carried on by the assessee did not constitute manufacturing activity. It is only on 24th June, 2010, the Board has issued a Circular to the effect that the process of pickling does not amount to manufacture. Therefore, during the relevant period, that is, during the period from 2nd March, 2005 to 31st December, 2005, it could not be said that the issue was settled and that the assessee paid duty on decoiled HR/CR coils knowing fully w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
