TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 701X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he said notification has clearly excluded job workers from the purview of payment of excise duty if ultimate manufacturer was to pay the duty at the time of clearance. Therefore, this amendment of 2005 since has only fixed manufacturer liable to comply with Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, job worker cannot be asked to comply the same again on the ground that he is also a part of the manufacturing process. There being a clear finding of the adjudicating authority that the processes undertaken by the job worker were incidental and ancillary to manufacturing or production and hence, amounts to manufacture or production of goods that is specifically excluded from the purview of taxable service, which is also found reflected in the writt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 012 to December 2016 appellant had availed Cenvat credit against job work activity, which is an exempted service, and not maintained separate record for which as per Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 an amount of ₹ 29,44,907/-, @ 6 per cent / 7 per cent on the amount of ₹ 4,79,60,807/- received by it for its job work charges, was demanded through a show cause notice that was confirmed in the adjudication process and appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) resulted in a direction for re-quantification on proportionate basis to the tune of exempted service along with interest and equivalent penalty. Appellant questioned the legality of such order before this Tribunal. 3. In a memo of appeal and during course of hearin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 015, dated 29.10.2015 passed in the case of M/s. JBM MA Automotive Pvt. Ltd., Order-in Original No. PII/CEX/VSP/DIVN-III (CKN-1)/21/2015, dated 08.09.2015 passed in the case of M/s. JBM MA Automotive Pvt. Ltd, he further argued that it has been consistently held by the Tribunal that job work activity carried out in terms of Notification o. 214/86-CE (NT) cannot be treated as exempted service for which the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) confirming the duty demand etc. is liable to be set aside. 4. For contra learned AR for the respondent department submitted that the ratio of Hema Engineering Industries Ltd. case law is squarely applicable to the appellant and not the above referred decisions on which appellant s Counsel has place ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion has clearly excluded job workers from the purview of payment of excise duty if ultimate manufacturer was to pay the duty at the time of clearance. Therefore, this amendment of 2005 since has only fixed manufacturer liable to comply with Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, to my considered view, job worker cannot be asked to comply the same again on the ground that he is also a part of the manufacturing process. Further, Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 introduced a proviso vide Notification No. 13/2005 dated 01.03.2005 in respect of job workers, as per definition of job worker contained in Rule 12 AA of the Central Excise Rules, so as to extend the benefits of Cenvat credit on inputs to the job workers provided those inputs were use ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
