2018 (5) TMI 1050 - AT - Central Excise

Liability of duty - scrap generated at the job-worker s premises - Held that - the issue came up before the Tribunal in respondent assessee s own case M/s VE Commercial Vehicles Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane-I 2016 (2) TMI 554 - CESTAT MUMBAI , and has decided in their favor by holding that there is no liability of the assessee sending in the inputs for job work in respect of scrap generated at job workers end - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Duty liability on scrap generated at job-worker's premises.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed by Revenue against an Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (Appeals), Thane. The main issue was the duty liability on the scrap generated at the job-worker's premises. The Revenue contended that the respondent was sending inputs for job-working, and the scrap generated was not returned, requiring the respondent to discharge Central Excise duty on such scrap. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand, along with interest and penalty. However, the first appellate authority, relying on a previous decision of the Tribunal in the respondent-assessee's own case, set aside the order-in-original and allowed the appeal of the respondent.

The Member (Judicial) found that the first appellate authority correctly followed the law established by a higher judicial forum in the respondent's own case. It was noted that the issue had previously been decided in favor of the assessee by the Tribunal in their own case. The Member (Judicial) stated that there was no reason to interfere with the order passed by the first appellate authority, as it was based on established legal principles.

Consequently, the Member (Judicial) held that the impugned order was correct and legal, without any infirmity. The cross-objection filed by the respondent in support of the impugned order was also disposed of. As a result, the Revenue's appeal was rejected, affirming the decision of the first appellate authority.

In conclusion, the judgment upheld the decision of the first appellate authority, emphasizing the importance of following established legal principles and previous judicial decisions in similar cases. The Member (Judicial) found no grounds to interfere with the order passed by the first appellate authority, ultimately rejecting the Revenue's appeal.