9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1134X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to job worker and only mention that from the record maintained by the assessee it must be ascertained that goods have been received back – Thus, the appellant have strong prima facie case in their favour - the requirement of pre-deposit of Cenvat Credit demand, interest and penalty waived till the disposal – Stay granted. - E/56264/2013 - EX[SM] - Stay Order: 58023 /2013 - Dated:- 16-5-2013 - Mr. Rakesh Kumar, J. For the Appellant: Sh. N.K.Sharma, AR For the Respondent: Sh. Nagesh Pathak ORDER Per Rakesh Kumar:- The facts leading to this appeal and stay application are, in brief, as under:- 1.1 The appellant are manufacturers of sheet metal components and steel fabrications, chargeable to Central Excise duty under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hough job workers as prescribed in Central Excise Rules, as the goods after being processed has not been returned under the same job work challans but under challans/invoices issued by the job worker and those invoices/challans do not contain any particular for linking the same with the challans issued by the Appellant for sending the goods to the job workers. On this basis he concluded that the goods cannot be treated as having been received after processing. The appellant filed to an appeal to Commissioner (Appeals) against this order of the Additional Commissioner. The Commissioner (Appeals) vide order-in-appeal dtd. 10.12.12 dismissed the appeal. Against this order of the Commissioner (Appeals), this appeal has been filed along with sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pre-deposit of Cenvat Credit demand, interest thereon and penalty may be waived for hearing of the appeal and recovery thereon may be stayed till the disposal of the appeal. 4. Sh. Nagesh Pathak, the ld. departmental representative, opposing the stay application pleaded that the Board s Circular No.33/33/94-CX-8 dtd. 04.05.1994, though issued with reference to Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules 1994 is applicable even now, that when a manufacturer. Cenvat Credit availed inputs to job worker for processing/further processing and return the job worker must send the processed material under duplicate copy of the challans issued by manufacturer, that in this case the job workers instead of sending the material back under the duplicate copy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... disputed that the material was received from the job workers, though not under the duplicate copy of the job work challans. Ongoing through the invoices issued by the job worker I find that the invoices do mention the challan No. under which the goods had been received from the appellant for processing along with quantity. In view of this the Department s plea that the invoices under which the material was returned were not relatable to the challans under which the material had been sent, is prima facie, is not correct. In any case, when the receipt of the material from the job workers is not disputed, in my view the Cenvat Credit cannot be denied to the appellants as Rule 4(5)(a) of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 does not prescribe any particul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
