9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 332X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for use in automobile industry. In order to achieve high quality precision of the castings, the appellant-company imported machinery and established Unit II in July 2005 at Malumichampatti, Coimbatore for manufacture of rough castings and stock transferred to Unit-I situated in SIDCO Industrial Estate, Coimbatore. Unit-II was purchasing raw material, availing cenvat credit of the duty paid, manufacturing rough castings and stock transferring them under Central Excise invoices to Unit I on payment of duty on 110% of the estimated cost of production in terms of Rule 8 of the Central Excise (Determination of the Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000. Unit-I was availing cenvat credit of the excise duty paid on rough castings, manufacturing ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eals) upheld the same. Hence this appeal. 4. The Ld. Counsel Sri M.S.Nagaraja appeared and argued for the appellant. It is submitted by the counsel that for the earlier period on the very same issue, the appellant had preferred appeals before the Tribunal and vide Final Order No.40543-40544/2023 dt. 11.07.2023, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and also held that credit cannot be denied. Four show cause notices have been issued to Unit-I and II for the subsequent periods from October 2011 to December 2011 as tabulated below proposing to deny the cenvat credit availed on the excess duty paid by Unit II and also proposing to impose penalties on both Unit-I and II : Sl. No SCN No. Date Issued by Period Covered 1. C No.V/73/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty paid by Unit-II is eligible as cenvat credit to Unit-I which carried out manufacture and cleared the machined castings to independent customers on payment of excise duty as applicable. The situation of payment of duty by Unit-II and availment of credit by Unit-I thus leads to revenue-neutral situation. Therefore, in the absence of any deliberate contravention of the Valuation Rules, 2000, there is no justification to impose penalty on Unit-II or paying higher excise duty on the goods cleared from Unit-I which was entitled to avail credit of the duty paid by them. Ld. counsel prayed that the appeals may be allowed. 6. The Ld. A.R Sri Anoop Singh appeared and argued for the Department. The findings in the impugned order was reiterated by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
