Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2018 (4) TMI 1492

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rom the tenor of the notification, it is clear that inputs procured by the assessee are altogether different from the goods manufactured by the assessee. Refund claim of Cenvat credit - denial on the ground that the activity undertaken by the assessee does not amount to manufacture - Held that: - in the present case, the activity undertaken by the assessee amounts to manufacturer, therefore, the assessee is entitled to refund of Cenvat credit under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 which remains unutilized in the Cenvat credit account on export of goods. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of assessee. - .E/887/2010-Ex, E/58044/2013-Ex - FINAL ORDER NO.62251-62252/2018 - Dated:- 21-3-2018 - Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) and Mr.Anil G.Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Present for the Appellant: Sh. B.L.Narasimhan, Advocate/ Sh. Amarinder Singh, Advocate vice versa Present for the Respondent: Shri Satyapal, AR vice versa ORDER PER: ASHOK JINDAL Both sides are in appeal against the impugned orders. The assessee has also filed cross objection to the appeal filed by the Revenue. 2. The facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rein for availing exemption under the said notifications. It is the contention of the assessee that the activity of metalizing undertaken by the appellant amounts to manufacture as per the process stated by the assessee. He also submits clarification sought from the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology and it was clarified that there is a great deal of difference between the plastic film and the metalized film manufactured by the assessee. Therefore, the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Metelex India vs. CCE, 2004 (165) ELT 129 (SC) is not applicable to the facts of this case. He further submits that the Cenvat credit sought to be denied on the ground that the activity of metalizing does not amount to manufacture. It is a fact that the assessee has paid duty on the goods manufactured, therefore, in terms of the decision of Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ajinkya Enterprises-2013 (294) ELT 203 (Bom.), the assessee is not required to reverse the Cenvat credit as the duty paid on the goods manufactured by the assessee. 5. With regard to the rejection of refund claim, he submits that rejection of refund claim is based on the show cause notice .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... alized Rolls from the mounting it was kept for about 36 hours for aging for stickiness of Aluminium and Zinc on the Films; that after this the metalized rolls were sliitted on slitters in the required widths and then vacuum packed. He also stated that the metalized film was the basic raw materials for capacitor manufacturing (Annexure-I). 9. From the process explained by Shri R.Rohilla working as Production Manager, we find that as in the said process, the goods manufactured by the assessee have been transformed into good which are different and new after a particular process undertaken by the assessee and the goods are marketable as such. We find in this case that the raw material i.e. polypropylene/polyester is subjected to a complex process to ensure that one side of the insulting material is converted into a conductor having a desired thickness with adequate free margin and heavy edge. After metallization process the polypropylene film is no longer a film with insulting properties but a metalized film with conducting properties ready to be used in capacitors. Therefore, the raw material has been transformed into something new i.e. Electronic Capacitor Grade Aluminium Metali .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for use by IT/Electronics Industry - In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section(1) of section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Government, being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby exempts the goods specified in column(2) of the Table below, and falling under Chapters 82, 84, 85 or 90 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975), when imported into India for use in the manufacture of the finished goods specified in the corresponding column(3) of the said Table, from so much of that portion of the duty of customs leviable thereon which is specified in the said First Schedule, Provided that the importer follows the procedure set out in the Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 1996. TABLE S.No. Description of imported goods Description of finished goods (1) (2) (3) 54. Conveyor firing oven BTU; automatic testers; tape and reel machine; printers/screen printers; hot air blowers; metallising m .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Aluminium Metalized Dielectric Plastic Film which can be used for manufacturing electronic capacitors. Therefore, activity undertaken by the assessee shall amounts to manufacture. Therefore, we hold that the activity undertaken by the assessee amounts to manufacture. In that circumstance, the question of reversal of Cenvat credit does not arise. Therefore, the Revenue s appeal deserves no merit and the same is accordingly dismissed. 13. We further take note of the fact that the refund claim of Cenvat credit filed by the assessee has been denied on the ground that the activity undertaken by the assessee does not amount to manufacture, therefore, they are entitled for Cenvat credit. Consequently, they are not entitled for refund thereof. 14. As we have already held that the activity undertaken by the assessee amounts to manufacturer, therefore, the assessee is entitled to refund of Cenvat credit under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 which remains unutilized in the Cenvat credit account on export of goods. 15. In these terms, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. The Cross objection to the appeal filed by the Revenue is disposed in the above terms. 16. In the re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates