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

2017 (8) TMI 214

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... gh the job work - demand set aside. Whether The Additional Commissioner of Central Excise, Rohtak is having jurisdiction to issue SCN? - Held that: - the show cause notice has been issued by the Additional Commissioner of Central Excise, Rohtak, who is not having jurisdiction over M/s RIBL. Whether the extended period of limitation is invocable or not? - Held that: - As the demand is not sustainable on merits as well as on jurisdiction. Therefore, we are not going into the issue of limitation. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. E/1612-1614/2008-EX[DB] - Final Order No. 61457-61459 /2017 - Dated:- 25-7-2017 - Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Devender Singh, Member (Technical) Shri Pravee .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ption under Notification No. 49 50/2003. The matter was adjudicated. The demand of duty was confirmed on M/s RIBL through M/s Triveni along with interest and penalties on all the appellants were imposed. Aggrieved from the said order, the appellants are before us. 3. The Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that in this case, the show cause notice was issued to M/s Triveni to demand duty on the goods manufactured by M/s Triveni is not correct, as M/s RIBL has filed an undertaking in compliance to Notification 214/86 ibid and the said undertaking has been accepted by the Revenue. In that case, if there is any demand that is to be demanded from M/s RIBL not from M/s Triveni. He further submits that the adjudicating a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 6 The facts of the case are admitted that M/s RIBL who is located at parwanoo in the state of Himachal Pradesh have filed an undertaking in terms of Notification 214/86 dated 25.03.1986 before the Assistant Commissioner having jurisdiction over M/s Triveni and sent the raw material to M/s Triveni who after doing job work cleared the plastic bottles to M/s RIBL without payment of duty. In such circumstances, the following issues arises: (A) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case can duty be demanded from M/s RIBL through M/s Triveni or not (B) The Additional Commissioner of Central Excise, Rohtak is having jurisdiction to issue show cause notice in the facts and circumstances of the case. (C) Whether the extended peri .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ions is that the supplier of raw material gives an undertaking to the Assistant Commissioner having jurisdiction over the factory of the job worker that the said goods shall be (a) used in or in relation to the manufacture of the final products in his factory; or (b) removed on payment of duty for home consumption from his factory. In the present matter the Appellants have furnished an undertaking as stipulated in the Notification. Further, they have used the transformer oil for repair of the old and used transformers and as such have removed the transformer oil for home consumption instead of using the same in or in relation to the manufacture of the final products in their factory. The Notification permits them to remove the impugned good .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ial. He relied upon the decision in the case of CCE C, Surat v. Span Heat Transfer Equipment Mfrs. Pvt. Ltd., [2001 (135) E.L.T. 861 (T) - 2001 (46) RLT 845 (CEGAT)] wherein it has been held that the job worker who has manufactured the goods will pay duty upon the goods manufactured by it. He, further, submitted that as M/s. Apar Ltd. are manufacturer and the place of manufacture is Bombay, the officer having jurisdiction over the place of manufacture at Bombay has the jurisdiction to demand duty; that, therefore, the Additional Commissioner, Central Excise, Meerut does not have the jurisdiction to demand the duty; that thus the show cause notice and Order-in-Original are without jurisdiction. He also contended that the Revenue has wrongl .....

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