TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1503X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e preparation of the HR Coils by the respondent is not manufacturing of goods at all, because, it is simply cutting, slitting and strengthening of HR Coils purchased from Tata Steel. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - Tax Appeal No. 62 of 2006 - - - Dated:- 23-11-2016 - D.N. Patel and Ratnaker Bhengra, JJ. Shri Deepak Roshan and Amit Kumar, for the Appellant. Dr. Samir Chakroberty, Ms. Sheela Prasad, Shri M.S. Mittal and Abhijit Biswas, for the Respondent. ORDER [Order per : D.N. Patel, J]. - In this Tax Appeal, following substantial question of law has been raised : - Whether the Tata Ryerson Ltd. (assessee), who ceases to be manufacturer of excisable goods under section 2(f) of the Central Excis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Annexure 3 to the Memo of the Tax Appeal. The HR Coils prepared by the respondent is an exempted goods and, hence, upon the inputs of the exempted goods under Rule 6(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, this Cenvat credit upon the raw material could not have been availed and wrongly the respondent has availed the Cenvat credit for the period 3-3-2005 to 30-6-2005 which is ₹ 2,70,14,917.11 + cess at ₹ 5,40,298.33. It is also contention of the appellant that upon the exempted goods - HR Coils, the respondent has paid the tax and has recovered from the purchasers of HR Coils and, therefore, notice was issued upon the respondent and ultimately the notice was adjudicated upon and the respondent was held liable for and Cenvat credit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has already recovered the tax from purchasers of the HR Coils. Thus, no loss has been caused to the Union of India. On the contrary, Cenvat Credit is less than the amount paid by the respondent. These aspects of the matter have not been properly appreciated by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur while deciding Order-in-Original dated 27th January, 2006. This aspect of the matter has been properly appreciated by the CESTAT, Eastern Zone Bench, Kolkata while allowing the appeal preferred by the respondent vide order dated 10th July, 2006. No error has been committed by CESTAT, Kolkata in allowing the appeal preferred by the respondent. Thus, the Circular dated 2-3-2005 is of no help to this appellant as the goods - HR Coils is not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
