TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 595X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Held that: - it is evident that in some cases after receipt of the material on job-work basis, the finished goods could not be produced in the given time span. The materials received on job-work were returned to them (Principal). There is no dispute that such unprocessed inputs were returned, and/or was not received by the respective suppliers - even if the material which had been returned, though maybe from a different lot, by the goods being homogenous, in my view, it does not make any difference. In respect of the material received on job work, which could not be returned and would be used by the appellant for manufacture on their own account, the Cenvat credit would become available, in any case the situation is revenue neutral - exc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellants under the provisions of Rule 3(4) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002/2004. 3. Same as para 2.1 of his stay order. 4. Learned Counsel for the appellants states that there is no dispute about the fact that in respect of inputs received under job challan for job work, no Cenvat credit had been taken and also that in certain cases where due to some reasons, the material received for job work was not processed, the appellant decided to return the same and the same had been returned. There is no dispute that the raw materials returned to the customers was the same as of the same quality as the material which had been received, even if it may not be from the same lot. That in most cases the raw material returned to the customers was th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ies of the verification reports drawn at the premises of M/s Vimal Moulders (I) Ltd. However the copy of statement of Shri Batra supplied to them. However, the request for cross-examination was made, officers having visited the premises of Mr Vimal Moulders (I) Ltd. Gurgaon, to carry out verification. The allegation of the revenue is that the same goods received by the appellant for job work having not been returned to the supplier of material. It is submitted that so long the description of the products, value, quantity, quality of goods returned back being the same as received by the appellants from the respective supplier, they have correctly followed the provisions of law. It is further urged that the whole case of revenue is based on p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tatements. In answer it was stated that the statement prepared by him after stocktaking of WIP material, further indicating that item wise quantity of WIP material lying on production floor on the first of the month have been indicated in the said statements, and further stated that quantity of WIP materials are shown in the above statements pertain to our own materials only, it does not include job work materials. After a few days of recording of the statement dated 30 th of October, 2007 Mr. Mallick retracted his statement, vide letter dated 31/10/2007 addressed to the Supdt. Central Excise, Anti-Evasion Noida, stating that- I may submit that I only assumed charge of manager production since September, 2006 and had no personal knowledg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the factory and thereafter they cleared their own raw materials on which credit was availed, Accordingly, the learned Counsel states that there have been miscarriage of justice by not giving an opportunity for cross-examine the persons, the statement of whom, reliance is placed by the authority and on this score also the impugned orders are vitiated. 5. The learned A.R. for the revenue have defended the impugned order and emphasized that materials returned by the appellant company to the customers, which was received on job work, was not the material received from them but was the material which had been purchased by the appellant company for manufacture of plastic components on their own account and in respect of which Cenvat credit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be proved 7. Having considered the rival contentions, it is evident that in some cases after receipt of the material on job-work basis, the finished goods could not be produced in the given time span. The materials received on job-work were returned to them (Principal). There is no dispute that such unprocessed inputs were returned, and/or was not received by the respective suppliers. The Department's allegation is that in a number of cases the material returned to the customers was not the one which had been received from customers, but was from the stocks of Cenvat credit taken inputs of the appellants. In this case there is no dispute that the inputs were returned to the customers. On such facts, even if the material which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
