9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1091X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Respondent (s) Per Mr. Anil Choudhary. The issue in this appeal is, whether the respondent-assessee can be said to be a manufacturer for 'Parnala' as the same is got manufactured by others on job work. 2. The brief facts are that the respondent-assessee was engaged in manufacture and clearance of excisable commodities being Hand tools and other tools of a kind used in Agricultural, Horticult ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cordingly, SCN dated 30.08.2010 was issued to the appellant, proposing to demand duty of Rs. 12,07,079/- with interest and further penalty was proposed under section 11 AC of the Act read with Rule 173Q of CER Rules, 1944. The SCN was adjudicated on contest and the proposed demand was confirmed with equal amount of penalty under Section 11AC of the Act. The contention of the respondent-assessee wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edger account, Balance sheet for job charges paid to the Job workers, copy of challans and vouchers of the disputed period. Evidencing the delivery of raw materials to the job workers as also job charges paid in the form of debit notes. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) also found that the respondent-assessee got Parnala manufactured by the job workers on principal to principal basis. Job workers wer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be said to be manufacturer of Parnala. Further, there are no such findings recorded by the Courts below that the appellant have not got the Parnala manufactured on job work basis but have manufactured it themselves by hiring labourers. Thus, I hold that supply of raw material to another for manufacturing of goods with drawing/design and specifications, does not make the supplier a manufacturer of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
