9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1292X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earing the ld. A.R. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant-company is engaged in the manufacture of "Cut Tobacco" falling under Tariff itemsNo. 24039970 and different brands of Cigarettes falling under Tariff item No. 24022010, 24022020, 24022030 & 24022050 of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They are also availing the Cenvat credit of duty/tax paid on the inputs, capital goods and the input services in terms of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The appellant-company is a contract manufacturer of their parent company namely M/s Godfrey Phillips India Ltd., N. Delhi (Hereinafter also referred to as "GPI"). 3. The appellant-company vide their letter dated 23.09.10 informed the department about return of 343 C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n floor and used in the manufacture of fresh cigarettes as there was no factual evidence to this effect except an entry in the "Cigarette From the Market Register" to prove the use of such retrieved tobacco in the manufacture of fresh cigarettes. The jurisdictional Range Officer further observed that sometimes retrieved tobacco is mixed with fresh tobacco in a very small quantity, may be 3% only. And so mixed tobacco (called charge) is then used for the manufacture of fresh cigarettes. Thus, it appeared that the retrieved tobacco, being one year old, could not be used in total as input and as such a small quantity was used after mixing with the fresh tobacco in the manufacturing of cut-tobacco/cigarettes. It was also observed that the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rules, 2004. On appeal Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the order and allowed the assessee appeals. Hence the present appeal by the Revenue. 6. We find that the issue relates to interpretation of the Provision of Rules 16 which read as under:- "RULE 16. Credit of duty on goods brought to the factory. - (1) Where any goods on which duty had been paid at the time of removal thereof are brought to any factory for being re-made refined re-conditioned or for any other reason, the assessee shall state the particulars of such receipt in his records and shall be entitled to take CENVAT credit of the duty paid as if such goods are received as inputs under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002 and utilise this credit according to the said rules." 7 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pal Ltd. Vs. CCE, Noida, 2010(261)ELT272(Tri.), while allowing the stay application of the appellant has also held that the goods receive d for the purpose of re conditioning, repairing, remaking cannot be termed as "inputs". It is by a deeming fiction the same are treated as if inputs and the duty paid originally paid either by the manufacturer who actually manufactured and cleared the goods is permitted to be taken as credit. I also agree with the contention of the appellant-company that there is no condition under the said Rule 16 that the said returned goods should be put to use as such an input for the manufacture of final product. Therefore, I do not find any irregularity in the process of ripping undertaking by the appellant-company ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
