TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1241X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant is not required to pay the excise duty when such re-processed goods are cleared but are required to reverse the Cenvat credit availed at the time of re-entry of the goods back into the factory. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - Excise Appeal No. 3841 of 2010 - Final Order No. 50486/2018 - Dated:- 31-1-2018 - Hon ble Shri Justice Dr. Satish Chandra, President And Hon ble Shri V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) Ms. Surabhi Sinha, Advocate for the appellant Shri R.K. Mishra, Authorized Representative (DR) for the respondent ORDER Per. Justice ( Dr. ) Satish Chandra The present appeal is filed against Order-in-Appeal No. 449 (DKV) CE/JPR-I/2010 dated 30/09/2010. 2. The brief facts o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt the appellant paid the CVD due on such taper/roller bearings and availed the Cenvat credit on the same, at the time of return of taper/roller bearing in the factory. Subsequently, they received the orders from the railways for supply of the taper/roller bearings, but before supply of such taper/roller bearings various processes were carried out on the re-imported taper/roller bearing within the factory. After completion of the process and re-packing of the same, the goods were send to the Railways after payment of applicable excise duty which happened to be less than the CVD paid on the re-import. (ii) Department was of the view that the processes which were undertaken on the re-imported taper/roller bearing before clearing of the sam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er. We have also perused the list of various processes carried out by the appellant on the re-imported goods within the factory. Though the list of processes is elaborate, it cannot be said that the processes have changed the goods substantially and anything new has come into existence. The re-packing of the same will not alter the nature of the goods. Accordingly, we are of the view that the re-imported goods have been subjected to only various processes of repair and refurbishment and same cannot be considered as processes of manufacture as per Section 2 (f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 7. In view of the conclusion as above, we are of the view that the appellant is not required to pay the excise duty when such re-processed goods ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
