9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (7) TMI 129X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... undertaking job work of aluminium castings and electrical stampings. The respondents received duty paid inputs i.e. CR Sheets availed Cenvat credit for the purpose of use in the manufacture of finished goods cleared on payment of duty. They were also procuring CR sheets from the principal manufacturer for job work under the proper challan, no Cenvat credit was availed. Show cause notices were issued, alleging that the respondents were using duty paid inputs CR sheets for the manufacture of job work goods. It has been alleged that duty paid CR sheets were used in the manufacture of own dutiable finished goods and exempted job work goods and, therefore, the respondents are liable to pay 8% of the value of the exempted goods under Rule 6(3) of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (183) E.L.T. 353 (Tribunal-LB). (2) M. Tex DK Processors (P) Ltd. v. CCE, 2001 (136) E.L.T. 73 (Tribunal). (3) M. Tex DK Processors (P) Ltd. v. CCE, 2002 (146) E.L.T. A309 (S.C.). (4) P P Fabrics (P) Ltd. v. CCE A, 2000 (121) E.L.T. 823 (Tri.) = 2000 (41) RLT 466 (CEGAT) (5) CCE, Jaipur v. Milan Mills, 2001 (46) RLT 623 (CEGAT). (6) Lupin Laboratories v. CCE, Indore, 1994 (71) RLT 914 (Tribunal). (7) Kitply Industries Ltd. v. CCE, Noida, 2003 (57) RLT 915 (CEGAT). 4. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records, the relevant portion of the Adjudication Order for the purpose of proper appreciation of the facts and the issues of the present case are reproduced below :- "As per facts on record, I note t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f CCR 2001 2002 and therefore chargeable to the said amounts @ 8% or @ 10% of the sale value of the said exempted job worked goods. Now the question arises as to whether or not the said Electrical Stampings Laminations and Aluminium Castings manufactured by the noticee on job work basis out of the raw materials supplied by the principles, can be treated as exempted goods under the provisions of the Modvat Credit/ Cenvat Credit Rules." 5. The ld. Advocate on behalf of the Respondent has taken us the copy of challan, on the basis of which the respondent received the raw material from the principal manufacturer for job work. It is seen that the said challans were issued under Rule 4(5) (a) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, which is reprod ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it Rules is not sustainable. It is seen that the Tribunal in the case of Shree Rayalaseema Dutch Kassenbown Ltd. v. CCE, Tirupathi - 2006 (76) RLT 464 (CESTAT- Bombay) held that demand of duty on job worker working under Rule 4(5)(a) for the reason that raw material supplier has not followed the provision of Notification No. 214/86-CE, is not correct. Hence, the contention of the Revenue, in the present case, that the procedure under Notification No. 214/86-CE were not followed, has no merit. 7. We find that the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Sterlite Industries (I) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune - 2005 (183) E.L.T. 353 (Tribunal-LB) following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. v. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
