TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (10) TMI 893
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re that the appellants are manufactures of economizer coils and super heater coils which are parts of boilers. The appellants were the job worker of M/s ISGEC. Pursuant to an agreement wherein pre-bended steel tubes were supplied free of cost to the appellants by M/s ISGEC accompanied by invoices indicating payment of duty. The appellants took the Cenvat Credit of the duty indicated in the invoices. The appellants undertook the certain processes of manufacturing of the said coils which were then cleared to M/s ISGEC on payment of duty. The appellants issued two invoices; one for the free materials supplied by M/s ISGEC and the other for the labour charges and the goods used by them for manufacture of the said coils. On receipt of the said c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iff Act, 1985, therefore, the economizer coils are only parts of the boilers and can only be considered a boiler once the workmanship and compatibility with the other components are checked. Various parts of a boiler are manufactured by M/s ISGEC which are then cleared along with the said coils on payment of duty. There is no dispute that M/s ISGEC has paid the duty on the said coils. Therefore, it is cleared that the goods in question has suffered duty at the end of M/s ISGEC on transaction value, therefore, if duty is demanded from the appellants then it will be payment of duty on the same products twice. In that circumstances also no duty is payable. He further submits that the coils are complete, only once the testing of said coils are ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nts is not imposable. 5. On the other hand, ld. AR submits that as goods have been cleared by the appellants to M/s ISGEC and who cleared the goods as such therefore, the appellants are required to pay the duty on the said goods in terms of Rule 10A(ii) of the Rules. Therefore, he prayed that impugned orders are to be upheld. 6. Heard the parties and considered the submissions. 7. In this case, the facts have not been disputed that the appellants are job worker and after manufacturing the goods and clearing on payment of duty to M/s ISGEC and M/s ISGEC is taking the credit of duty paid by the appellant and further cleared the goods on payment of duty at transaction value. The case of the Revenue is that in terms of Rule 10A(ii) of the Ce....