9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 804X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e case of AUTOMATIVE STAMPINGS ASSEMBLIES LTD. VERSUS COMMR. OF C. EX., VADODARA [ 2009 (6) TMI 773 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD] , wherein this Tribunal has observed We find no reasons to add the value of such lugs in the value of the clutch covers manufactured by the appellant, especially when such job has been done by the appellant in terms of Rule 4(5)(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 - the appellant is not liable to pay duty on job-worked goods. Reversal of CENVAT Credit - allegation that the inputs were not received in their factory and cleared directly to their customers - HELD THAT:- Although the goods were not received in their factory and cleared directly to their customers, but on payment of duty. When the inputs have been cleared to their customers directly on payment of duty, the payment of duty shall be treated as reversal of cenvat credit as held by the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE VERSUS AJINKYA ENTERPRISES [ 2012 (7) TMI 141 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] , wherein Hon ble the Hon ble High Court has observed once the duty on final products has been accepted by the department, CENVAT credit availed need not be reversed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he said valuation rules) read with clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 4 of the said act and rules 4, 6, 8 of the said rules read with section 3 of the said act in as much as the said assessee did not take into consideration the money value of free issue materials supplied by their customer in the assessable of control panels manufactured and cleared in the year 2006-07 and thereby evaded payment of Central Excise duty including Education Cess to the tune of Rs.70,48,249/- (Rupees seven lakh forty eight thousand two hundred forty nine only) against such value of free issue materials of Rs.4,31,87,799/- by way of undervaluation of the goods (detailed in Annexure-IV); c. have contravened the provisions of clause (ii) clause (iv) [Explanation-I] of Rule 6 of the said valuation rules read with clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 4 of the said act and rules 4, 6, 8 of the said rules read with section 3 of the said act in as much as the said assessee did not take into consideration the money value of drawings, artwork, design work in the assessable value of control panels and fans manufactured as per their customer s specification and cleared in the year 2006-07 and 2007 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessable value of the final product since the appellant had not availed the credit on such inputs and their activity falls under job-work provision. Therefore, they were not required to pay duty, but since the appellant used their own cenvatable inputs so they paid duty on the job charges including the value of their own inputs. 6. With regard to the allegation that appellant has not included the money value of drawings and design received from their customers in the assessable value of their finished goods for discharging central excise duty, it is his contention that the goods received by their customers from their end, as per specification of their customers, are used in manufacture of finished goods at the end of their customers and cleared on payment of central excise duty and so any expenditure incurred by the customers is included when they sell the said goods. On the issue of taking cenvat credit without receiving inputs in their factory, it is the contention of the appellant that they have cleared those goods on payment of duty, therefore, payment of duty shall amount reversal of cenvat credit. Thereafter, the matter was adjudicated and demand as proposed in the show ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hallans on which the appellant has not taken the cenvat credit and after job-work, the appellant is clearing the same to the principal manufacturer without charging any duty and the appellant is charging only the job-work charges and the principal manufacturer is discharging duty on final product. In that circumstances, relying on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Automative Stamping Assemblies Ltd. (supra), wherein this Tribunal has observed as under:- 4. It stand explained before us that appellant is primarily a manufacturer of clutch covers which are being cleared by them without welding lugs to the same. Their buyer GSCL, who are engaged in the manufacture of clutch assembly, placed orders with them for clutch covers at the sale price of Rs. 417.50 per piece. By another order, the appellants were entrusted job work for welding 3 lugs on each clutch cover. We agree with the learned advocate that instead of first clearing the clutch cover to GSCL and then bringing it back to the factory for welding 3 lugs on the same would invite extra financial burden. As such, instead of actually clearing the clutch covers, the appellants did the job work on the same and retur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Ashok Enterprises - 2008 (221) E.L.T. 586 (T), Super Forgings - 2007 (217) E.L.T. 559 (T), S.A.I.L. - 2007 (220) E.L.T. 520 (T) = 2009 (15) S.T.R. 640 (Tribunal), M.P. Telelinks Limited - 2004 (178) E.L.T. 167 (T) and a decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of CCE v. Creative Enterprises reported in 2009 (235) E.L.T. 785 (Guj.) has held that once the duty on final products has been accepted by the department, CENVAT credit availed need not be reversed even if the activity docs not amount to manufacture. Admittedly, similar view taken by the Gujarat High Court in the case of Creative Enterprises has been upheld by the Apex Court [see 2009 (243) E.L.T. A121] by dismissing the SLP filed by the Revenue. Therefore, we hold that the appellant is not required to reverse the cenvat credit on the input cleared without receiving in the factory on payment of duty 16. With regard to inclusion of drawings and design supplied by the principal manufacturer to the appellant, we find that the inclusion sought to be made in the assessable value on the basis of imaginary figures, which is not sustainable. It is a fact on record that the appellant has not borne any cost of drawing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
