9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 410X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on adjudicating order confirming recovery of Rs. 36,38,930 demanded in three notices issued for the period from September 2010 to March 2012 despite two orders of the Tribunal having held that duty liability did not arise on the 'waste and scrap' generated at the facility of the 'job worker' contracted by them. 2. According to Learned Counsel for that appellant, the Tribunal had been called upon to intervene when a claim for refund of Rs. 20,19,820, discharged erroneously as 'duties of central excise' for the period from January 2007 to December 2007 on 'waste and scrap' generated by their 'job-worker', had been wrongfully withheld by the lower authorities and the order dated 7th January 2016 gives no room for doubt. As they had stopped di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 013] in final order [final order no. A/85803/2023-EX ] dated 2nd March 2023 against order [order-in-appeal no. BR/340/Th-I/2012 dated 26th November 2012] of Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai-I for the period from 31st January 2008 to 31st August 2008. 5. We have heard Learned Authorized Representative. 6. The order of the Tribunal in their own appeal pertains to the immediate preceding period wherein it has been held that '3.0 Issue involved in the present case is no longer res integra. 3.1 Rocket Engineering Corporation Ltd. Vs. CCE - 2005 (191) ELT 483 (T.), "Duty demand of Rs. 43,679/- has been confirmed and penalty of equal amount has been imposed upon the appellants herein on the ground that the scrap generated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s end, which is not received back from the job workers within the specified time in terms of Notification No. 214/86-C.E., dated 25-3-1986 as amended r/w Rule 4(5)(a) of Cenvat Credit Rules?" B. "Whether scrap generated at the job workers end out of the processing of the inputs is required to be returned to the supplier and, if it is not returned back whether the supplier of inputs is required to pay appropriate Central Excise thereon?" 3. Having heard rival parties and having examined the findings recorded in the order in original, it is not in dispute, that the assessee had paid duty on the scrap generated at the factory of the job worker for the period April 1999 to March 2000. There is no liability on the principal manufacturer-re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .)], tribunal held: "4. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. There is force in the submissions of the learned Advocate that no process of manufacture has been taken by them so as to attract the Central Excise duty on such waste of the paper arising during the course of manufacture of the cigarettes. The Revenue has not controverted the contention of the learned Advocate for the appellants that there is no provisions in Cenvat Credit Rules, 2001 providing for payment of duty on waste and scrap, which has arisen during the manufacture of the finished product. Such a provision had existed in the erstwhile Rule 57F of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. In view of this, the impugned order is not sustainable. Accordingly, we set ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
