9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 308X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts are that the appellant M/s. Inova India (hereinafter referred to as 'M/s. Inova') is engaged in the manufacture of Electronic Flushing System (EFS). During the visit by the officers of the Headquarters Preventive Unit, it was observed that M/s. Inova were manufacturing Electronic Flushing Systems bearing the brand name "Parryware" and were clearing the same on payment of duty. 2.2 On further enquiry, it appeared that M/s. Roca Bathroom Products Pvt. Ltd. (appellant in Appeal No. E/529/2012 - hereinafter referred to as 'M/s. Roca') were supplying the major input viz. urinal casing to M/s. Inova on sale basis. M/s. Inova fixed the Electronic System in the urinal casing in order to provide automated function. The urinal casings with this a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere was a difference of 200 to 250 per cent in the sale price of the goods from M/s. Roca when compared to the sale price of M/s. Inova to M/s. Roca. The brand name "Parryware" was owned by M/s. Roca and M/s. Inova did not have any claim on such trademark. When the brand name is affixed, the ownership of the product rests with M/s. Roca and then M/s. Inova had no right to sell the goods. Consequently, when there is no right to sell the goods, the amount received by M/s. Inova was only compensation of the expenditure incurred by them and received through sales invoices. The Department observed that M/s. Inova was only acting as a job worker for M/s. Roca and that the goods were not ordinarily sold at the factory gate of M/s. Inova and hence, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich is extracted below : "Explanation. - For the purposes of this rule, job-worker means a person engaged in the manufacture or production of goods on behalf of a principal manufacturer, from any inputs or goods supplied by the said principal manufacturer or by any other person authorised by him." (Emphasis added) 4.2 From the above Explanation, it is very clear that the job worker not only manufactures goods on behalf of the principal manufacturer, but should also manufacture the goods from any inputs/raw materials supplied by the principal manufacturer. In the present case, the urinal casings are not supplied by M/s. Roca. In fact, it is purchased by M/s. Inova from M/s. Roca. No items were supplied free of cost by M/s. Roca. As M/s. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e demand arises out of the allegation that the appellant M/s. Inova has manufactured goods as a job worker on behalf of the principal manufacturer M/s. Roca. It is an admitted fact, as seen from the Show Cause Notice as well as the impugned order, that M/s. Inova has procured the urinal casings from M/s. Roca by transaction of purchase and sale. Merely because the goods manufactured by M/s. Inova bear the brand name of M/s. Roca, the Department has viewed the transaction as a manufacture done by a job worker on behalf of the principal manufacturer. 8. The very same issue was discussed by the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Sujhan Instruments (supra) wherein the Tribunal observed as under : "8.3 A perusal of the SCN No. 104/2009, dated 23-10 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orker" for the purpose of Rule 10A ibid. The inputs or goods are not supplied free by Honeywell, or other persons authorized by Honeywell. 8.4 On the other hand, Sujhan have to buy these inputs and goods etc. at a price. The goods are not cleared by Sujhan without payment of Central Excise duty. The goods are cleared by Sujhan to Honeywell only after discharge of Central Excise duty on the assessable value and the value indicated in the invoices from Sujhan to Honeywell. 8.5 Thus just because the goods manufactured or produced by Sujhan are purchased by Honeywell on contract that should detract from acceptance of the transaction between Sujhan and Honeywell to be one of principal to principal basis. The arrangement between Sujhan and Ho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ged by the former are treated as sale to SIPL on which value Central Excise duty and sales tax was being discharged. The Tribunal following the ratio already laid down in Gillette Diversified Operations Ltd. v. Commissioner - 2007 (217) E.L.T. 551 (Tribunal) held that by merely indicating vendors of raw materials or by giving advance for procuring raw material or even installing equipment given by SIPL would not render Coromandal as a job worker. 9. In view of the findings and conclusions herein above and following the ratio already laid down by Tribunal in Coromandal Paints Ltd. (supra), Impugned Order No. 20/2010, dated 3-9-2010 (relating to Appeals E/810/2010 and E/1/2011) are set aside and the said appeals are allowed in toto with con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
