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

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2009 (4) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2009 (4) TMI 63 - HC - Central Excise


Issues:
1. Treatment of own final products returned by customers for re-processing as inputs under Rule 57-A of Central Excise Rules, 1944.
2. Applicability of specific provisions of Rule 173H and Rule 173L of Central Excise Rules, 1944 to the goods.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to the treatment of final products returned by customers for re-processing as inputs under Rule 57-A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, and the applicability of specific provisions of Rule 173H and Rule 173L of the same rules. The respondent, a manufacturer of axle-shafts used in tractors, refurbished and reprocessed defective axle-shafts returned by customers, subsequently selling them as fresh products. The issue arose when the department challenged the manufacturer's claim of modvat credit on the resale of refurbished products, arguing that modvat credit had already been claimed on the inputs when the axle-shafts were first sold.

The authorities, including the Commissioner (Appeals), upheld the department's plea, but the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT) allowed the appeal without providing independent reasoning. The High Court emphasized the necessity for the manufacturer to demonstrate the use of fresh material or the initiation of the entire manufacturing process during refurbishing or reprocessing to claim modvat credit. Additionally, the Court highlighted that if parts on which modvat credit was previously claimed were used in the manufacturing process, fresh modvat credit could not be claimed again.

The Court acknowledged the factual nature of the dispute regarding the excise duty paid on the refurbished axle-shafts and the claim for modvat credit on the inputs. Consequently, the Court set aside the CEGAT's order, remanding the matter for fresh consideration. The CEGAT was directed to reevaluate the case in light of the Court's observations, emphasizing the need for a detailed examination of the factual circumstances surrounding the payment of excise duty and the modvat credit claimed by the manufacturer.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates