TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 181X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C. (A.R.) For Respondent ORDER Per Shri P. K. Choudhary The appellant is engaged in manufacturing Electrical Meters classifiable under Chapter 90 of the First Schedule of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellant had sent Brass insert, brass slotted pinch screws and current terminals etc. to the job worker under Rule 4 (5) (a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. No reversal was made in regard to the inputs removed as such when sent to the job workers. The period of dispute is September, 2008 to March, 2009. The job worker received the goods in partially processed conditions for further processing/assembled with their own product on raw basis. The said inputs were removed from the factory premises of the appellants under c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mr. of Central Excise, Belapur reported in 2010 (262) ELT 671 (Tri.-Mumbai). He also filed copies of the Rule 45 (a) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. On the aspect of the limitation, the Ld. Counsel relied on the following decision of the Hon ble High Court: Sourav Ganguly Vs. Union of India reported in 2016 (43) S.T.R. 482 (Cal.) and Simplex Infrastructures Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Kolkata reported in 2016 (42) S.T.R. 634 (Cal.) 3. The Ld. D.R. appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterated the findings of the Lower Authority. 4. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 5. I find that the appellant strongly contested on merit as well as limitation. It is contended that it is a case of Revenue Neutrality. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ght to have been followed by the Appellants. The necessary sequitur to payment of duty on the PCB Assemblies is that the Appellants are entitled to the credit on the said PCB Assemblies, which are received by the Appellants in their factory for the manufacture of the Electronic Balances. When the components such as inductor coil, hybrid circuits, heat sink thermistors etc. have been accepted as inputs for the Appellants by the Department, the eligibility of the Appellants to the Cenvat credit on such inputs cannot be disputed. In the present case, M/s. Leo Circuit Boards Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Hermes Electronics were paying duty on the value attributable to the PCBs cleared by them after fitting the components supplied by the Appellants. Thus t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ocessing to the two units. Furthermore, the processed goods viz. assembled PCBs were sent to the Appellants by the two units, albeit on payment of duty. Under the circumstances, the sending of the inputs by the Appellants under Rule 4(5) (a) challans to the two units cannot be faulted with. Though the Commissioner (Appeals) has proceeded on the basis that the Appellants were issuing purchase orders to the two units and thus the transaction was not job work but on principal to principal basis yet it is significant that the charges against the Appellants in the impugned notice are not framed on the basis of the said purchase orders but on the sole basis that M/s. Leo Circuit Boards Pvt. Ltd. M/s. Hermes Electronics were clearing the PCB ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
