9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 1245X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant s own case, where it was held that ' The said issue stands decided by the Tribunal in the appellant s own case in M/S. GREAVES COTTON LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF GST CENTRAL EXCISE CHENNAI [ 2024 (5) TMI 1470 - CESTAT CHENNAI] has held that 'the appellant is not the manufacturer of the waste and scrap and therefore, there is no liability on the appellant to pay the duty on the waste and scrap manufactured at the job worker s end. Further, the provision of Rule 4(5)(a) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 nowhere states that the waste and scrap generated at the job worker s end makes the principal manufacturer liable to payment of duty on such waste and scrap.' The impugned order cannot sustain. The same is set aside. The appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he learned counsel, that the above issue stands settled by the various orders of this very Bench in respect of the very same appellant for various earlier years, namely:-- M/s. Greaves Cotton Ltd. Vs. CCE, Chennai I vide Final order No. 41315/2017 dated 27.7.2017 M/s. Greaves Cotton Ltd. Vs. CCE, Chennai III vide Final order No. 41710/2017 dated 18.8.2017 M/s. Greaves Cotton Ltd. Vs. CCE, Chennai vide Final order No. 41505/2018 dated 11.5.2018 M/s. Greaves Cotton Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of GST CE vide Final order No. 40621/2019 dated 28.3.2019 M/s. Greaves Cotton Ltd. Vs. CCE, Commissioner of GST Central Excise vide Final order No. 40226 to 40228/2023 dated 31.3.2023 7. Vide Final Order No. 40226 to 40228/2023 dated 31.3.2023, this Bench has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... idered by the Tribunal in the case of Rocket Engineering Corporation Ltd. Vs. CCE, Pune 2006 (193) ELT 33 (Tri.--Mum.), laying down that such requirement to pay duty in the hands of the principal manufacturer exist only in erstwhile Central Excise Rule 57F (3) and there is no such provision in the subsequent CENVAT Credit Rules 2001. The said decision of the Tribunal stands upheld by the Hon ble High Court of Bombay reported as 2008 (223) ELT 347 (Bom.). The said order has been followed by other orders of this Tribunal for subsequent periods. 6. We also notice that the decision in Final Order No.41307/2017 dated 26.7.2017 was based on Rule 4(5)(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2001, whereas the impugned orders have invoked Rule 4(5)(a) of Cenv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
