9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (5) TMI 31X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6.2005 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Bangalore. 2. The appellants availed cenvat credit amounting to Rs. 39, 33,128/- on the basis of the supplementary invoices issued by their job worker. The Department issued a Show Cause Notice to the appellants for disallowing the above cenvat credit for the reason that the differential Central Excise duty covered by the supplementary invoices was paid for the past period by the job worker on account of an offence case registered by the department in contravention of Rule 7 (1) (b) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. The Original Authority gave a finding that the appellants had paid the duty covered by the supplementary invoices to their suppliers namely the job worker and therefore ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oted OIO No. 4/2003 dated 28.3.2003 to argue that there has been a suppression or wilful mis-statement of fact. Since the CESTAT has set aside the above mentioned order, the argument of the Revenue is not tenable. (b) The department has chosen to ignore the Supreme Court case in respect of M/s. International Auto Ltd. Vs. CCE -2005 (68) RLT 341 (SC)=2005 (5) RC 292 dated March 17, 2005, which is very much applicable in the correct context to decide whether there was a non-levy or short levy. (c) Job workers are an independent unit and the transaction between the appellant and the job worker is on the principal-to-principal basis and not as a principal to agent basis and as such the dispute between the department 'and the job worker is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Telco which were used by Telco in the manufacture of excavators. Telco made available to the assessee several inputs on which credit was taken by Telco. The assessee used the inputs made available by Telco as well as its own inputs in manufacturing the assemblies. The assessee cleared the assemblies from its factories upon payment of excise duty by including only the value of the inputs put in by it and adding thereto the service charges. The Department demanded excise duty on the basis that in valuing the assemblies the value of the inputs made available by Telco ought also to have been included; and the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal upheld the demand. On appeal to the Supreme Court: Held, reversing the decision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
