9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 276X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The second part of the Rule 16 clearly stipulates that the duty paid goods should be received by the appellant and appellant shall be entitled to take cenvat credit under CCR 2002. So they are eligible to avail the credit on the basis of documents as prescribed under CCR 2002. As already stated, the invoices in question are not in the name of the appellant under Rule 7 of CCR and therefore the appellants are not eligible to avail the said credit. Appellant informed that their customer, M/s.Nav Bharat Corporation sent duty paid Trailers to remake and convert for required model. It is also stated that as per Rule 16 of the said Rules, they proposed to bring the duty paid trailers along with the documentary evidence for the duty payment an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... basis of 8 invoices issued by M/s.Valvo India Pvt. Ltd. as stated above. A show cause notice dt. 16.1.2007 was issued proposing to deny the erroneous cenvat credit of ₹ 8,34,784/- taken by the appellants on the invoices issued by M/s.Valvo India Pvt. Ltd. along with interest and penalty. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of duty along with interest and imposed penalty of equal amount under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the adjudication order. 2. The learned advocate on behalf of the appellants submits that the appellant received duty paid goods for repair, recondition under Rule 16 of the Central Excise Rules. It is submitted that Rule 16 of CCR 2002 as it stood at the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich credit has been taken by appellant, are not prescribed under Rule 7 of CCR 2002. 4. After hearing both sides and on perusal of records, I find that the main contention of the learned advocate is that appellant received duty paid goods in their factory for being remade, reconditioned under Rule 16 of the CCR 2002. The relevant portion of Rule 16 of the said Rule reads as under :- Rule 16. Credit of duty on goods brought to the factory. -(1) Where any goods on which duty had been paid at the time of removal thereof are brought to any factory for being re-made, refined, re-conditioned or for any other reason, the assessee shall state the particulars of such receipt in his records and shall be entitled to take CENVAT cre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2; (iv) a first stage dealer or a second stage dealer, in terms of the provisions of Central Excise Rules, 2002; 6. In the present case, it is seen that the appellant availed credit on the basis of invoices issued by M/s. Volvo India Pvt. Ltd. consigned to M/s. Nav Bharat Corporation. Admittedly, these invoices are not prescribed under Rule 7 (1) (a) of the CCR 2002. The learned advocate contended that duty paid goods were received by the appellant for being remade, refined, reconditioned or for any other reason from M/s.Nav Bharat Corporation who received the documents from M/s.Volva India Pvt. Ltd. which would be covered under Rule 16. I am unable to accept this contention of learned advocate. The second part of the Rule ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
