9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1204X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ttrakhand). Another manufacturer M/s Dynasty India Pvt. Ltd. is located at Noida, UP. The appellants were availing area based exemption from payment of Excise duty under Notification No.50/2003-CE dated 10/06/2003. The appellant was getting on job work, the drawing of copper wires out of copper rods from the said M/s Dynasty India Private Ltd, Noida (M/s Dynasty for short). For this purpose goods/wire rods, bought by the appellant, were supplied directly to M/s Dynasty. The said work was carried out independently by M/s Dynasty, on payment of consideration (job charges) by the appellant. The appellants were issuing challans on which it was specifically mentioned that they were exempt under Notification No.50/2003-CE. 3. After the job work ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nufacture of exempted goods under „area based exemption‟ by appellant and were liable for Central Excise duty. They deliberately did not inform the Department the relevant facts. To evade the duty, they cleared the goods clandestinely from Noida unit, mischievously showing as cleared from Haridwar (UK). Thereafter the goods were removed from M/s Dynasty, Haridwar, UK to appellant, on fake challans shown to be issued by M/s Dynasty, Haridwar, UK. Thus, it appeared that M/s Dynasty, Noida where liable to pay Central Excise duty on the manufacture of Copper Wires, out of Copper Rods, on job work basis and hence by not paying duty have contravened the provisions of Rules 4, 6, 8 & 11 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. Further, revenue w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal dated 21.10.2015 was pleased to reject the appeal, observing that it is admitted fact that the appellant received goods after completion of job work by manufacturer located at Noida, under cover of job work challan which did not indicate any details of duty payment. The appellant have categorically stated that it did not operate under the scheme of Notification No.214/86-CE with respect to job work wherein provisions have been made for clearance of goods manufactured on job work, without payment of duty, as duty payment gets postponed and liability transferred to principal manufacturer. This contention of the appellant is without any merit that it was unaware of the fact that M/s Dynasty, Noida had not paid duty on the job worked goods ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ings:- i) M/s Jitendra Chauhan Vs CCE, Noida Final Order No.71034/2016 dated 01/11/2016. ii) M/s Castrol India Ltd. Vs CCE 2008 (222) ELT 408 (Tri-Mumbai) iii) Final Order No.E/70539/2017-EX[DB] dated 17th May, 2017 in the case of M/s Escorts Ltd. Vs CCE, Noida. 7. The learned A.R. for revenue have relied on the impugned order. 8. Having considered the rival contentions, I find that the Courts below have rightly held that the appellant, a limited company, have knowingly misled the said M/s Dynasty and have received the job worked goods, although dutiable, without payment of duty. Further, from the facts on record, evidently the appellant was aware that the job work is being done by M/s Dynasty, Noida- UP, and such goods were dutiable, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
