2014 (12) TMI 316

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s. 74,68,635/- was confirmed against the Appellants along with equal mandatory penalty. 2. The facts of the case briefly stated are as under : The appellants were engaged in doing the job work for M/s. Diesel Loco Modernization Works, Patiala which involved the following : (i)      Case Hardening & Tempering of Piston Pins. (ii)    Case Hardening & Tempering of Cam Rollers. (iii)   Machining of Pinions. (iv)   Case Carburizing and Hardening of Bull Gears. (v)     Complete Heat Treatment Process inclusive of stress relieving & tempering process, machining, finish grinding of Bull Gear. They were availing of the benefit of exemption Notification No. 2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tification No. 214/86-C.E. in the absence of the undertaking to be given by the supplier, they referred to the judgment of India Fabricators v. CCE, Trichy - 2005 (191) E.L.T. 339 (Tri.-Chennai) wherein it is stated that the question of denying the benefit of the Notification to the appellants who is a job worker for the contravention, if any, committed by the supplier of the raw material does not arise and consequently the benefit of Notification No. 214/86-C.E. cannot be denied to the appellant. Similarly, in the case of CCE, Ahmedabad-II v. Bharat Foundry - 2009 (246) E.L.T. 561 (Tri.-Ahmd.) in the context of an exemption Notification No. 84/94-C.E. with similar requirement it was held that in view of the substantial compliance on the pa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... would only be to the extent of Rs. 13,12,559/- as against Rs. 74,68,635/- confirmed by the impugned order-in-original. However, the substantive issue in this case is whether the benefit of Notification No. 214/86-C.E. can be availed of by the Appellants in the absence of the undertaking by the supplier referred to above. As may be seen from the various judicial pronouncements referred to earlier, it is settled law that the benefit of the said exemption cannot be denied merely because the supplier of the raw material had not submitted an undertaking as per the said Notification particularly when there has been proper accountal of the goods. As may be seen from the show cause notice as well as from the order-in-original, there is no allegatio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X