9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 738X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... adjudicating authority has been dismissed. The Additional Commissioner, Kanpur by his order dated 26-10-2009 has confirmed the demand amounting to Rs. 6,14,611/- alongwith interest and penalty against the appellants. 3. The demand pertains to the period comprising of November and December 2007. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of printed plastic pouch rolls classifiable under chapter sub-heading 3920 69 19 of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The department under letter dated 7-11-2007 issued by the Board clarifying that the process of lamination/metallization of duty paid film did not amount to manufacture as the product being film to start with and remains as film even after process of lamination/met ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the value of the duty paid thereon, besides that the purchaser would avail the credit thereof even though the purchaser has purchased non-dutiable product. 5. The facts as such are not in dispute. It is not in dispute that the final product was exempt from payment of duty during the relevant period. At the same time, being unaware of the said position, the appellants continuesd to pay the duty on such product during such period. Simultaneously, he continued to avail the cenvat credit on the inputs utilized in manufacture of such final product. The Apex Court in Metlex (I) Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of C. Ex., New Delhi reported in 2004 (165) E.L.T. 129 (S.C.) held that the process of lamination and utilization does not amount to manuf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vat credit. If there was no manufacture, there can be no payment of duty also. There is no dispute that appellants had paid a higher amount of duty on the goods than the credit taken. If the credit taken was not leviable, what was required was only to adjust the duty paid against the credit". 8. The contention in the present case on behalf of the department is that once the credit availed is allowed to be utilized for payment of duty the benefit thereunder accrues to two parties, one to the manufacturer of the final product himself and another to the purchaser of the such product, in cases where the final product is not dutiable and yet the duty is sought to be paid. The contention is that once the duty is allowed to be paid, the liab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
