9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 507X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the supplier unit cannot be challenged by revenue in charge of recipient unit - when the supplier has paid duty and issued valid invoices, the Respondent is eligible to take credit, moreover the issue herein is a revenue neutral situation. Therefore, the argument vehemently put-forth by the Appellant does not hold water - appeal rejected - decided against appellant. - E/53/08, Cross Objection No.CO-68/08 - FO/A/76153/2016 - Dated:- 24-10-2016 - Shri P. K. Choudhary, Member(Judicial) Shri S.S.Chattopadhyay, Supdt.(AR) for the Revenue Shri Rajeev Agarwal, C.A. for the Respondent ORDER Per: Shri P. K. Choudhary This is an Appeal filed by the department against Order-in-Original No.53/Commissioner/CE/Kol-IV/2007 dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with proviso to Section 11A(1) of Central Excise Act, 1944 along with interest and why penalty should not be imposed under Rule 15 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944. 1.2 The above show cause notice resulted in the passing of the Order-in-Original and it was held that : I find that the assessee placed indent of C.R. Sheets to M/s.TISCO, Jamshedpur and M/s.TISCO, Jamshedpur, did not sent the C.R. Sheets directly to the assessee. Instead, M/s.TISCO, Jamshedpur, sent HR/CR Coils of iron or non alloy steel on payment of duty to M/s.Tata Ryerson Ltd., Jamshedpur, for cutting/slitting of the H.R./C.R. Coils into H.R./C.R. Sheets of lesser width, according to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oils does not amount to manufacture. Admittedly appellants have paid duty on their final product. The issue stands decided in favour of the appellants by umpteen number of decisions of the tribunal reference in this regard is made to the tribunal decision in the case of J.R.K. Indus. (Pvt.) Ltd. 2006(74)RLT 574 as also tribunal decision in the case of Shri Krishran Inds. 2005(182) ELT 369 (Tri-Del) and in the Hon ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Commissioner vs. Narmada Chematur Pharmaceuticals Ltd. 2005 (179) ELT 276(S.C.). The Hon ble Supreme Court has held that payment of duty on the final product without availing the exemption is optional and the Modvat credit cannot be denied on the ground that the assessee should have a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15/Kol/06 dated 10.07.2006, relied on by the Adjudicating Authority, has not attained finality, as an appeal has been filed before the Hon ble Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi against the said order by the Commissioner, Central Excise, Jamshedpur. 2. The Appellant Revenue is represented by Shri S.S.Chattopadhyay, Supdt.(AR) and the Respondent is represented by Shri Rajeev Agarwal, C.A. 3. Heard both sides and perused the Appeal records. The issue in the present case is as to whether Respondent is eligible to take CENVAT Credit on the impugned goods. As held by the Adjudicating Authority the present issue is settled in favour of the Respondent by various forums. In the case Commissioner of Central Excise Customs Vs. MDS Switchgear Lt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... position, we agree with the view taken by the Tribunal and find no merit in these appeals which are dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs. 3.1 In view of the above, the issue stands settled by various judgements that the credit cannot be denied at the receiver's end. Therefore, when the supplier has paid duty and issued valid invoices, the Respondent is eligible to take credit, moreover the issue herein is a revenue neutral situation. Therefore, the argument vehemently put-forth by the Appellant does not hold water. Following the ratio laid in the above judgement cited (supra), the Appeal is rejected. Cross Objection also gets disposed of. (Operative part of the order was pronounced in the open court.) - - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
