TMI Blog2003 (12) TMI 171X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, the issue involved is whether Modvat credit of the duty is to be disallowed to M/s. BTR Wadco Automotive Ltd. (now M/s. Metzeller Automotive Profiles India Pvt. Ltd). 2. Shri B.L. Narsimhan, learned Advocate submitted that M/s. Metzeller Automotive Profiles manufactured weather strips and anti vibration system, which were being manufactured in two separate divisions in the same premises; that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Rule 57AB(1C) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The learned Advocate, further, submitted that under provisions of Rules 9(1), 49 and 57AB(1)(b) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, duty of excise is payable only on the removal of the goods from the factory of the manufacturer; that the removal contemplated in these Rules is the physical removal and not deemed removal; that in the present case, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n ownership does not amount to removal of the inputs and capital goods. 3. Countering the arguments, Shri U. Raja Ram, learned Departmental Representative, submitted that the explanation below sub-rule (1)(b) of Rule 57AB of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 clearly provide that when inputs or capital goods are removed from the factory, the manufacturer of the final products shall pay the appropri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing Anti Vibration System in the same premises in which earlier Appellant No. 1 used to manufacture those goods. The admitted fact is that neither the inputs nor the capital goods have been removed from the factory premises. The provisions of Explanation to sub-rule 1(b) of Rule 57AB is applicable only in those cases when inputs or capital goods are removed from the factory. The deemed provisions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
