Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (3) TMI 399

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appellant was entitled to take the credit thereof. If it is contended by Revenue that duty was paid in excess, then that issue is to be taken up with the supplying unit by the concerned authority having jurisdiction over the supplying unit and it is not open to the central excise authority having jurisdiction over the appellant to question the correctness of duty paid by the supplier-unit; the receiving unit was entitled to take credit of duty shown in the invoice. Incidentally, CBEC Circular No.877/15/2008-CX, dated 17.11.2008 is supportive of this view. The appellant has clearly stated that the machine was used in its manufacturing unit. The balance-sheet figures show not only the charges received for use of the machine for job work, b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 along with interest and equal amount of penalty was also imposed. 2. When the case was called today, there was no representation on behalf of the appellant, but a letter has been received stating that the matter may be decided on merits and accordingly, I take up the appeal on merits. 3. The facts of the case are as under:- (i) The appellant received from its sister unit a crane under invoice dated 06.04.2005 which showed its depreciated value, but the amount of CENVAT credit taken was ₹ 2,92,516/-, which was the duty paid by the sister unit when acquiring the crane. The contention of the Revenue is that the CENVAT credit should be restricted to the duty payable on the depr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and no duty was paid/payable on goods produced on job work basis and therefore credit on CNC machine was not allowed. 6. I have considered the contentions of both sides. I find that as per Rule 3(5) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 are stipulated as under:- When inputs or capital goods on which Cenvat Credit has been taken are removed as such from the factory, or premises of the provider of output service, the manufacturer of the Final Products or provider of output service, as the case may be, shall pay an amount equal to the credit availed in respect of such inputs or capital goods and such removal shall be made under the cover of invoice referred to in Rule 9. Thus, as per the aforesaid rules, the supplier of the crane, i.e .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... charges, sales figures of goods manufactured are also shown. Resultantly, I do not find sufficient support to sustain the allegation of inadmissibility of CENVAT credit availed on Colchester CNC crane. 8. Coming to the duty demand of ₹ 6,389/- relating to scrap generated, I find that the demand has been confirmed on the basis of the following table:- Year Qty. of Steel Bar used (KG) Qty. of scrap generated (likely 75%)(KG) Value of Scrap (Rs.) Duty leviable (Rs.) Duty paid (Rs.) Short paid duty (Rs.) 2005-06 5,498.50 4,123.500 41,235.00 6,730 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates