Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Alumeco India Extrusion Ltd, Agarvanshi Aluminium Ltd., Mr. B.B. Agarwal, Mr. Rahul Agarwal And Mr. P. Bhaskara Rao Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad

2017 (11) TMI 478 - CESTAT HYDERABAD

Clandestine removal - job-work - Whether the total quantity of 1071.3863 MT of materials sent by Agarvanshi Ltd under job work challans in terms of Notification No 214/1986-CE were received by Alumeco Ltd? - Held that: - the department has failed to establish from the record that 380.256 MTs of materials have not been received by Alumeco Ltd. Burden of establishing the fact of receipt of material cannot be shifted upon Alumeco Ltd. Whether Alumeco Ltd performed the declared process of homogeniza .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

fore, no hesitation in holding that the entire quantity of raw materials to the tune of 1071.3863 MTs sent by Agarvanshi Ltd has been received by Alumeco Ltd. - Whether the job work profiles cleared by Alumeco Ltd were manufactured out of the materials supplied by Agarvanshi Ltd? - Held that: - There is nothing in the impugned order to show that the raw materials used for manufacture and clearance of profiles to Agarvanshi Ltd was procured clandestinely. There is nothing to show that profile .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eports were also submitted to the Management. The Investigating Officers had taken all these documents and it is beyond imagination that if there are cash purchases of raw material and cash sale of profiles, the inventory would tally month to month. There was no possibility of huge quantity of invoices without receipt of raw material. We find the revenue in response thereto has failed to point out any discrepancy with the records produced by the Bhaskar Rao in his appeal. We, therefore, hold tha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

th regard to the fact that Notification 214/1986-CE has to be strictly interpreted and procedural lapse cannot be condoned, cannot apply to the present case as in the present case - the benefit of Notification 214/1986-CE cannot be denied to Alumeco Ltd. They are, therefore, not liable to pay duty on the clearance of profiles to Agarvanshi Ltd. - Whether appropriate duty has been paid on the profiles sent by Alumeco Ltd.? - Held that: - there is nothing in the impugned order to indicate that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

by Agarvanshi in respect of profiles is not enough to hold that profile sent to Agarvanshi Ltd by Alumeco Ltd has been cleared in the market without payment of duty. Efforts should have been made by the Revenue to disprove the invoices or documents produced by Bhaskar Rao to indicate that Agarvanshi sold the profiles in market without raising any invoice. The details produced before us by Bhaskar Rao are not only confined to invoices showing payment of duty by Agarvanshi Ltd but the same has als .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d, we find that there is no finding by Adjudicating Authority. The Adjudicating Authority has not even rejected the submissions made by Bhaskar Rao, former Managing Director of Alumeco Ltd. This demand is also, therefore, set aside. - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/1767/2011-DB, E/1658-60/2011-DB & E/1494/2011-DB - A/31758-31762/2017 - Dated:- 6-11-2017 - Mr. M. V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) Mr. M. Chandrasekharan, Sr. A .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sions Ltd [hereinafter referred to as "Alumeco Ltd"], appellant in Appeal No: E/1767/2011 are manufacturers of aluminium extrusions which are also known as 'profiles'. Prior to 3rd February 2006, Alumeco Ltd was known as Progressive Aluminium Company Ltd and thereafter as Pennar Profiles Ltd. Mr. P. Bhaskar Rao-appellant in Appeal No: E/1494/2011 became the director of Alumeco Ltd in the year 1997. Based on an intelligence, factory and office premises of Alumeco Ltd was searche .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ealed that Alumeco Ltd had clandestinely manufactured and cleared:- (i) 1063.6222 M.Ts of aluminium extrusions to Agarvanshi Ltd without account, without raising invoice and without payment of central excise duty during the period from September 2002 to August 2005, in the guise of job worked billets. Amount of central excise duty involved on such clearances is to the tune of ₹ 1,87,59,245/-; (ii) 46.0166 M.Tons of aluminium extrusions to Agarvanshi Ltd, in the guise of billets, without ac .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ng were already homogenized. (b) Alumeco Ltd did not have homogenization facility before June 2005. Agarvanshi Ltd had sent or shown as sent logs for the job work of homogenization upto 31.05.05. But homogenization of logs in Alumeco Ltd prior to June 2005 was an impossibility and, therefore, the claim of homogenization of logs/billets on job work appeared to be false. (c) Alumeco Ltd has not sent logs received or alleged to have been received from Agarvanshi Ltd further to any other firm for Ho .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Ltd but such logs after conversion into cut billets were used by Alumeco Ltd in the manufacture of extrusions in its factory. (f) 281.695 M.Tons of in-house manufactured logs shown to have been dispatched by Agarvanshi Ltd to Alumeco Ltd for job work of Homogenization and Cutting were not used for cutting by Alumeco Ltd, inasmuch as cutting of such logs was not documented in Billet Cutting Reports of Alumeco Ltd. (g) The logs have been described in job work challans as semi-finished whereas logs .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

two challans description of the goods was wilfully camouflaged. Scrap was described as aluminium metal and wire rod as 'wire rod scrap'/'aluminium metal'. (j) In challan No 65 dated 31.05.05, the goods shown as sent are described as ingots (semi-finished). On or around this date, Agarvanshi Ltd was casting logs also. Therefore, converting molten metal into ingots and then sending it for conversion into logs which can be done only after re-melting was not be economically viable a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

facture of profiles. Logs of 6 dia were also available on demand with NALCO. Had Agarvanshi Ltd genuinely required such logs, they would have got these from NALCO by placing orders for 6 dia logs. But that did not appear to be the intention as revealed from the facts and circumstances of the case. (m) In fact, no account showing challan-wise receipt of the billets was maintained by Agarvanshi Ltd. It is claimed that the receipt was accounted in the RG-I Register along with production of billets .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(o) Sometimes material was not sent by Agarvanshi Ltd along with the job work challans and that sometimes the material sent was different, in quantity and description from that mentioned in the challans. (p) 281.695 M.Tons of Agarvanshi Ltd's in-house manufactured logs were not received by Alumeco Ltd. Instead, equal quantity of NALCO logs appeared to have been received clandestinely. (q) There is no evidence of the job work processes having taken place in Alumeco Ltd for goods except the j .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ob work process of Homogenization and Cutting or conversion into billets as the case may be. Agarvanshi Ltd have fraudulently shown the non-existent billets as issued for manufacture of profiles. The non-existent billets appear to have been replenished by unaccounted scrap as deposed by Agarvanshi Ltd's officials in their statements above. (u) Sri Rahul Agarwal, Executive Director of Agarvanshi Ltd and looking after plant and production has in his statement dated 12.03.07 stated that Alumeco .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ement dated 12.03.07 that the job work process mentioned on the job work challans of Agarvanshi Ltd were not done by Alumeco Ltd and that Alumeco Ltd manufactured profiles which was done with his knowledge and consent. According to the department the facility of job work under Rule 4(5)(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002/2004 read with Notification No 214/86-CE dated 25.03.86 has been misused by Agarvanshi Ltd and Alumeco Ltd as a cover to manufacture and clear profiles clandestinely with activ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

46.0166 M.T of extrusions cleared to Agarvanshi Ltd. It further proposed imposition of penalty on Mr. Bhaskar Rao, Ex-Managing Director of Alumeco, Agarvanshi Ltd and its Directors Mr. Bharat Bhushan Agarwal and Mr. Rahul Agarwal. All the Noticees contested the Show Cause Notice on merits. The Adjudicating Authority did not agree with the submissions made by the Noticees. The Adjudicating Authority inter alia framed following issues for consideration: (i) Whether Alumeco Ltd manufactured extrusi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ut payment of duty to the extent of ₹ 7,73,079/-? (iii) Whether Alumeco Ltd is liable to pay duty so evaded along with interest? On the issue as to whether Alumeco Ltd manufactured extrusions/profiles out of their own raw material for Agarvanshi Ltd, it has been held by the Adjudicating Authority that since the materials received for job work and the material procured by Alumeco Ltd are maintained in common pool, there is nothing to indicate that the profiles cleared are made out of materi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

usions to Agarvanshi Ltd in the guise of billets during November 2002 and December 2002. It has been also been ordered by the Adjudicating Authority that an amount of ₹ 1,95,32,324/- debited by Alumeco Ltd from the Cenvat Account to be appropriated against the confirmed duty demand. Penalty of ₹ 1,95,32,324/- has been imposed on Alumeco Ltd under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Penalty of ₹ 20,00,000/- has been imposed upon Agarvanshi Ltd, ₹ 10,00,000/- upon .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

l No:E/1660/2011). 6. Ld. Sr. Advocate Shri M. Chandrasekharan with Shri S.Sunil, Advocate appeared on behalf of Alumeco India Extrusion Ltd and Shri G. Natarajan, Shri P. Dwarakanath and Shri V.J. Sankaran ld.Advocates appeared for M/s Agarvanshi Aluminium Ltd, Shri B.B Agarwal and Shri Rahul Agarwal. Shri Bhaskar Rao appeared in person. Revenue was represented by Mr. B. Ajay Kumar, Mr. R. Narasimha Murthy and Mr Arun Kumar. Oral and written arguments were made by all the parties. 7. Ld. Sr. Ad .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

td and the duty liability has referred to the fact that even the show cause notice admits that 691.130 MTs of raw material was received by the appellant from Agarvanshi Ltd. The submission of the appellant regarding balance quantity of 380.256 MT has been rejected by the Adjudicating Authority stating that in the reply dated 24.07.08 and 29.04.10 no cogent evidence has been produced to show receipt of aforesaid 380.256 MT of materials except contending that the allegation that they used their ow .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

notes, purchase bills relating to alleged purchase of wire rods, statement of account of PALCO, a computed hard disc from the packing section, RG-1 Registers, RG-23A Registers, input invoices, inward registers, files containing melting/casting records and production records. The conclusion of the Adjudicating Authority in para 27 makes no reference to the presence or absence of any of the contents of the documents resumed by the department. This shows lack of application of mind on his part. He .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

re of final products for Agarvanshi Ltd and holds that final products sent to Agarvanshi Ltd were made using Alumeco's own raw material. The adjudicating while levelling the said charge has legally failed to establish the said charge. The allegation cannot be deemed to have been established on the ground that the person against whom the allegation is made has not been able to establish that the allegation is wrong. This principle of evidence was duly recognized by the Hon ble Supreme Court i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n the Show Cause Notice that any part of the raw material has been diverted by the appellant for some other use or to some other person. That the raw material received from Agarvanshi Ltd was not stored separately is no ground to allege that it was not used for the purpose which was stated in the job work challans since homogenization and cutting and conversion into billets were essential parts of process of manufacture of profiles. Without these processes, the appellant could not have manufactu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nished Products manufactured by the appellant and cleared to Agarvanshi Ltd tallied with the quantity of raw material received by the appellant from Agarvanshi Ltd keeping in view melting losses. (iv) The benefit of Not.214/86-CE has been denied on the reasoning that there is no evidence regarding the fact that job work activity has been done on the materials supplied by Agarvanshi Ltd as no separate accounts are maintained by Alumeco Ltd in respect of material received for job work. All the mat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

llans, the process mentioned was homogenisation and cutting or conversion into billets but the appellant has carried out the processes other than what was mentioned in the job work challans. As regards the denial of benefit of Notification and the reasoning of the learned Commissioner, the appellant submit as under:- (i) The appellant manufactured and dispatched profiles to Agarvanshi Ltd by declaring the process as homogenisation and cutting or 'conversion into billets'. It is the submi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hich are used for extrusions of profiles. Logs of long length are to be cut into billets of required length, which is determined by the size and type of profile to be extruded. In the industry, however, the term logs and billets are used interchangeably. The findings of the Adjudicating Authority are without proper examination of the conditions of Notification and also without factual appreciation of the matter. Homogenization is a process wherein the elements in the metal are equally distribute .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

g to the processes mentioned in the Job Work Challans viz. homogenisation and cutting and conversion into billets. It is, therefore, the submission of the appellant that since the processes indicated in the job work challans are necessary for manufacture of profiles the benefit of Not.214/86-CE cannot be denied. (ii) With regard to reasoning of the Adjudicating Authority that no separate accounts are maintained for materials received for job work, it is the submission of the appellant that if th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f one looks at the requirements under the Notification as summarized by the Adjudicating Authority in para 30 of his Order, it would be clear that, but for the undertaking to be given by Agarvanshi Ltd to the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise that the goods will be disposed of in the manner prescribed in the Notification, all other conditions were satisfied. It is the case of the appellant that the goods were manufactured by the appellant out of the raw material kept in stock and received .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ellant after job work were disposed of as contemplated in the Notification after due payment of duty by Agarvanshi Ltd even in the absence of the undertaking. There is no evidence whatsoever of the raw material supplied by Agarvanshi Ltd being used for the production of any other goods for any other manufacturer or about diverting any part of the raw material into the market. Reliance by the Adjudicating Authority on the sole allegation that the job work to be done was totally different from the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o Agarvanshi Ltd clandestinely in the guise of homogenised and cut billets is, to say the least, a deliberate attempt to obfuscate the whole issue which was before him and avoid the only tenable conclusion that the raw material had all been converted into billets by the appellant and delivered as profiles to Agarvanshi Ltd who cleared them on payment of full duty. In fact, towards the end of para 14 of the order, the Adjudicating Authority states that the appellant while dispatching the job work .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s involved in the job work entrusted with the Appellant, calling the goods as profiles in the guise of 'job worked billets'. It was the clear case of the appellant before the authorities that the raw material had been converted into billets which were dispatched to Agarvanshi Ltd who cleared the same as profiles on payment of appropriate duty. There was no under the guise of clearances as billets. Since job work challans had indicated conversion into billets of the raw materials in some .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nshi Ltd was to give an undertaking to the Departmental authorities having jurisdiction over the appellant that the said goods shall be used to manufacture the final product in Agarvanshi Ltd and removed on payment of duty from its factory. It has been proved that the goods have been so removed in the prescribed manner. Clause (d) (iii) of the Notification also requires Agarvanshi Ltd to undertake to discharge the liability in respect of the duty leviable on the final product. It is Agarvanshi L .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d in the SCN. If the undertaking, as referred to in (ii) above is not given by Agarvanshi Ltd, the omission cannot be a ground to deny the benefit of the exemption to the appellant. The case law on the subject was furnished, e.g., Moon Chemicals Vs. CC - 2007 (215) ELT 43 (T). It is, therefore, clear that liability on account of job work is to be discharged by Agarvanshi Ltd and not by the appellant. (vi) As regard the confirmation of duty demand of ₹ 7,73,079/-, there is no discussion at .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

iles, paying duty of ₹ 90/- per k.g. basic price, on which a duty amount had been availed as Modvat by Agarvanshi Ltd. Alumeco Ltd would have sold profiles at ₹ 115/- per kg. The same duty amount would have been availed by Agarvanshi Ltd as Modvat. There was, therefore, no Revenue implication to prompt the appellant to such a mis-declaration. Further, even if the allegation is true, duty had been paid by the appellant on a basic price of ₹ 90/- per kg. The SCN has demanded duty .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

absence of any finding by the Adjudicating Authority, the confirmation of duty demand of ₹ 7,73,079 has to be set aside. 8. On behalf Agarvanshi Ltd and its directors, it was submitted before us that: (i) Agarvanshi Ltd has received duty paid raw materials in their registered premises and duly accounted for the same in their statutory records. (ii) Alumeco Ltd received the duty said raw materials and accounted the same in the records and manufactured profiles contrary to the description of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

used in the manufacture of dutiable goods. Mr. Bhaskar Rao, former Managing Director of the Alumeco Ltd has submitted that:- (i) The findings of the Adjudicating Authority that Alumeco Ltd dispatched 1063.6222 Mts of profiles manufactured out of Alumeco's own raw material without invoice and without payment of duty is not tenable for the following reasons: (a) The value of the above transaction is approximately ₹ 10 crores in payment of cash for Raw material procurement and approximat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ory reconciliation statement at pages 162-163 shows that every kilo of material is accounted in Alumeco Ltd. Monthly inventory reports are submitted to the management. The IO has taken all these documents. If there are cash purchases of raw materials and Cash sales of Profiles how does the inventory tally month to month. The inventory verification is done also by internal auditors, statutory auditors and central excise auditors some times. There is no possibility of sale of such huge quantity of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

b work Challans as listed in the Annexure E.1 to E.6 of SCN. (ii) That the SCN itself accepts that 691.130 Mts. of raw material is received by Alumeco Ltd along with job work challans. This means there is no dispute that profiles manufactured out of this 691.130 Mt of raw material is on job work basis. The balance quantity of 380.2563 Mts of raw material (consisting of the following types of raw material) is also received through Job work challans. No. of job work challans Description Quantity o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ndry log book recorded the scrap as other scarp and not as scrap from Agarvanshi Ltd. This appellant has provided evidence that up to last kilo is received from Agarvanshi Ltd on job work basis in pages 155-161 of the appeal. The Investigating Officer first arrived at this conclusion and thereafter selectively looked at the record and also made assumptions ignoring other relevant records. That the entire quantity of 1063.6222 Mts of profiles supplied to Agarvanshi Ltd is only on job work basis a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

iod and presented in pages 188 to 269 of appeal paper book for the months from Sep 2002 to July 2005. These invoices are obtained from DGCEI by the appellant. The month-wise invoices of Agarvanshi Ltd were presented in these pages will give the following details: i. Agarvanshi Ltd's Invoice No. ii. Date of Invoice iii. To whom the Profile sold by Agarvanshi Ltd iv. Agarvanshi Ltd's profile No. v. Corresponding Alumeco Ltd's profile No. vi. Quantity supplied under this invoice and vii .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ayment of duty by Agarvanshi Ltd during the relevant period. 9. The department has also done similar analysis as above and shown at para 31.3 and para 37.2.4 of Show Cause Notice. No serious attempt has been made by the department to analyze all the invoices of Agarvanshi Ltd's for the period under investigation. It was the opinion of the Department that such an exercise is not possible. (v) The finding of the department that Alumeco Ltd has not maintained the Job work register in the prescr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

egisters in Annexure-IV and V respectively recording job work. Agarvanshi Ltd filed declaration of discharging of duty liability. These documents are filed at pages 295-306 of the Appeal. This reveals that this allegations are mere assumptions and against the facts on record and these records were taken into possession of the department. (vi) That no case for imposition of penalty under R.25 has been made out in the impugned order. 10. On behalf of the Revenue, it was submitted that:- (i) Invest .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lumeco Ltd. In view of this, Alumeco Ltd has used the inputs procured by them to the tune of 380.256 MT in the manufacture of aluminium profiles cleared to Agarvanshi Ltd. (iii) Aluminium profiles manufactured by Alumeco Ltd and sent to Agarvanshi Ltd was not exempted under Notification 214/1986-CE as job work was declared only for homogenization/billets cutting and that the inputs procured by Alumeco Ltd was used in the manufacture of profiles sent in the guise of homogenization/billets cutting .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

they were under the wrong impression that job work cannot be resorted to full manufacture clearly evidences malafide intention and to misguide this Hon ble Tribunal as they were getting aluminium manufactured on job work basis from Alumeco Ltd up to August 2002. (vi) The contention of Shri Bhaskar Rao that the aluminium profiles manufactured and cleared by Alumeco Ltd to Agarvanshi Ltd under the guise of job-work of homogenisation/cutting of billets/processing billets were cleared by Agarvanshi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he sale invoice of Agarvanshi Ltd does not ipso facto prove duty payment by Agarvanshi in respect of profiles manufactured and cleared by Alumeco Ltd in the guise of job-worked goods. (vii) That in the entire episode, either Alumeco Ltd or Agarvanshi Ltd failed to indicate any probable reason for mis-declaring the process of job work and thus, they did not discharge the onus to prove their bonafides or exemption from tax liability. (viii) Penalty has rightly imposed upon Shri Bhaskar Rao and als .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ofiles cleared by Alumeco Ltd were manufactured out of the materials supplied by Agarvanshi Ltd? (iii) Whether Alumeco Ltd is entitled to the benefit of Notification No 214/86-CE? (iii) Whether appropriate duty has been paid on the profiles sent by Alumeco Ltd. As regards the receipt of materials under job work challans by Alumeco Ltd, the Adjudicating Authority has himself referred to the fact that Show Cause Notice admits that 691.130 MT of materials sent for job work have been received by the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ebut the evidence relied upon in the Show Cause Notice. The Adjudicating Authority while arriving at such a finding has totally failed to take notice and acknowledge the documents/records resumed during the course of investigation. Para 5.2 of the impugned order gives the details of documents recovered during the investigation. These records pertained to production, packing and clearances of extrusions, job work records, credit notes, purchase bills relating to purchase of wire rods, statement o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

version of billets from scraps, wire rods and ageing of profiles received as shown as, did not take place in Alumeco Ltd. The Adjudicating Authority has failed to examine the contents of documentary evidence resumed from the premises of Alumeco Ltd. The contents of documents and records could have easily revealed the fact that 380.256 MTs of materials have been received by Alumeco Ltd or not. Appellant in this context has relied upon the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Shiromani Gurudwa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Ltd. Burden of establishing the fact of receipt of material cannot be shifted upon Alumeco Ltd. Whether Alumeco Ltd performed the declared process of homogenization and cutting cannot be a criterion to decide whether they have received material for job work from Agarvanshi Ltd. We also find from the record that the Adjudicating Authority has clearly held that profiles to the tune of 1063.6222 M.Tons have been manufactured by Alumeco Ltd. However, we find that no evidence has been lead by the dep .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ing receipt of materials at least to the extent of 691.130 MT by Alumeco Ltd. We have in our findings hereinabove, already held that why the findings of the Adjudicating Authority regarding non receipt of balance 380.216 MT of materials by Alumeco Ltd was not sustainable. On the ground that the materials received from Agarvanshi Ltd have not been stored separately cannot be made the basis to hold that the profiles were not manufactured out of materials supplied by Agarvanshi Ltd. If the profiles .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

stinely in the market. There is nothing on record to show procurement of material other than what has been supplied by Agarvanshi Ltd having been used for manufacture and clearance of profiles to Agarvanshi Ltd. Revenue has produced no evidence to show how Alumeco Ltd procured such a huge quantity of raw material for making profiles and clearing it to Agarvanshi. From the submissions made by Shri Bhaskar Rao one of the appellants, we find that the whole transaction is approximately to the tune o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

mpugned order. In fact, Agarvanshi Ltd has submitted that all the profiles received from Alumeco Ltd were cleared on payment of duty after due accountal in their books of accounts. Shri Bhaskar Rao during hearing has drawn our attention to the raw material inventory reconciliation statement annexed with the appeal paper book. According to him, every kilo of materials was accounted by Alumeco Ltd, monthly reports were also submitted to the Management. The Investigating Officers had taken all thes .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Agarvanshi Ltd to Alumeco Ltd under the job work challans. 13. The next issue which arises for determination by us is as to whether Alumeco Ltd is entitled to the benefit of Notification No 214/1986-CE. For denying the benefit of Notification No 214/1986-CE, we find that the Adjudicating Authority has proceeded on the reasoning that there is no evidence regarding the fact that job work activity has been done on the materials supplied by Agarvanshi Ltd as no separate accounts are maintained by A .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

done on the materials supplied by Agarvanshi Ltd. In the job work challans, the process mentioned was homogenisation and cutting or conversion into billets but the appellant has carried out the processes other than what was mentioned in the job work challans. Alumeco Ltd did not have the facility for homogenization up to 31.5.15. It is the submission of the revenue that strict interpretation has to be given while granting benefit of exemption. Procedural lapse cannot be condoned. While dealing w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s of required length, which is determined by the size and type of profile to be extruded. In the industry, however, the term logs and billets are used interchangeably. It is also the submission of the appellant that Homogenization is a process wherein the elements in the metal are equally distributed to get uniform properties for the metal to make it suitable for certain types of extrusions. From the records, we find that processes such as homogenisation and cutting or conversion into billets ar .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ly case, as we find, that has been made out against Alumeco Ltd is that instead of using the raw materials dispatched by Agarvanshi Ltd under job work challans they have used their own materials for manufacture of profiles. The reasoning given by the Adjudicating Authority that no separate records for raw materials received from Agarvanshi has been maintained and they formed common pool with Alumeco's raw materials cannot sustain as we find actually no effort has been made by the Adjudicatin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

efit of Notification No 214/1986-CE, especially in view of the fact that the process indicated in the job work challans are one of the necessary processes required for the manufacture of profiles. We also agree with the submission made by the appellant that both the inputs and final products are, admittedly, covered under Notification 214/86-CE, and the alleged mis-declaration makes no difference to the availability. We also find from the record that there is nothing to show that Agarvanshi has .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e of Moon Chemicals vs. CC - 2007 (215) ELT 43 (T) has held that the omission of filing an undertaking cannot be a ground to deny the benefit of the exemption under Not.214/86-CE. The submission of the revenue with regard to the fact that Notification 214/1986-CE has to be strictly interpreted and procedural lapse cannot be condoned, cannot apply to the present case as in the present case, it has been clearly established that: (i) Raw material sent for job work has been received by the job worke .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

turer (Agarvanshi Ltd) on the profiles sent by Alumeco Ltd. In this regard, it would be worthwhile to refer to the submission made by Shri Bhaskar Rao, one of the appellant before us, wherein he has submitted that he had analyzed the invoices of Agarvanshi Ltd during the period in dispute which is also annexed with the appeal paper book filed before this Tribunal. The month-wise invoices of Agarvanshi Ltd filed by him along with the appeal will give the following details of Agarvanshi's invo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e department to analyze all the invoices of Agarvanshi for the period under investigation. It was the opinion of the Department that such an exercise is not possible. To the said submission made by Bhaskar Rao, the Revenue has submitted that the documents furnished by Shri P. Bhashkar Rao indicated equivalent profile number of Alumeco Ltd and thus claimed that the said profile was manufactured by them. Agarvanshi Ltd got the profiles manufactured from Alumeco Ltd obviously to sell in the market .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d by Agarvanshi Ltd on payment of duty. From the submissions made on behalf of the Revenue, it is clear that they are not denying the fact that profiles sent to Agarvanshi Ltd has been received by Agarvanshi Ltd. Payment of duty shown in the invoice has also not been disputed. However, there is nothing in the impugned order to indicate that the profiles cleared by Agarvanshi Ltd are actually the profiles made by them using their own raw material. Revenue has also failed to show that the profiles .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version