9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (6) TMI 340X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods cleared by them and they were also able to produce proof of payment of NCCD by other two manufacturers for whom they had manufactured goods on job work basis, the claim of bona fide belief in respect of clearances to job worker seems to be justified. Therefore accordingly we have to set aside the invocation of extended period and penalty under Section 11AC imposed on the respondent. - E/364-365/2006 - A/610-611/2010 - Dated:- 8-6-2010 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (J) and Shri B.S.V. Murthy, Member (T) REPRESENTED BY: Shri R. Nagar, SDR, for the Appellant. None, for the Respondent. [Order per: B.S.V. Murthy, Member (T)]. - M/s. Mahendra Petrochemicals Ltd. the respondent was engaged in the manufacture of mainly core pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he raw material supplier, after manufacturing the same, on job work basis, from the materials received from outside the i.e. M/s. Vedic Life Sc Ltd. and M/s. Gateway Tele Soft Ltd., during the period April, 2004. Shri Bhurchand Khatana, Manager (Commercial) of respondent had admitted in his statement that both the above units had paid NCCD so due, after the clearance of their goods from factory premises of the respondent. As the respondent had failed to determine and pay NCCD on 178315 kgs. of polyester texturised yarn (PTY) valued at Rs. 1,39,85,584/- falling under SH. 5402.32 cleared for job work outside the factory for manufacture of other products during 1-7-2003 to 31-3-2004 which were subsequently sold directly from job worker's prem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... do so. He submits that in the absence of any evidence to show that POY used in the manufacture of PTY cleared to job worker had suffered NCCD, respondent is liable to discharge NCCD on the PTY cleared by them. He relies upon the decisions of the Tribunal in the following cases. 1. Paras Petroflis Ltd. v. CCE, Surat [2009 (237) E.L.T. 367 (Tri. -Ahmd.)] 2. Superfine Syntex Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Surat [2009 (237) E.L.T. 292 (Tri. -Ahmd.)]. 5. We have considered the submissions made by both the sides. In the absence of specific exemption, as observed by the Tribunal in the two decisions cited by the learned DR. exemption under Notification No. 67/95 in respect of captive consumption, the respondent was liable to discharge duty on POY manufac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egarding their bona fide belief is not acceptable. However when we take note of the fact that the respondent was paying NCCD in respect of PTY cleared by them and they were also able to produce proof of payment of NCCD by other two manufacturers for whom they had manufactured PTY on job work basis, the claim of bona fide belief in respect of clearances to job worker seems to be justified. Therefore accordingly we have to set aside the invocation of extended period and penalty under Section 11AC imposed on the respondent. 7. As regards penalty of Rs. 5,000/- on Shri Bhurchand Khatana, Manager (Commercial), in view of the fact that penalty under Section 11 AC has been set aside on the respondent question of penalty on him does not arise. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
