Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether Modvat credit on capital goods was deniable on the ground that they were used exclusively in the manufacture of exempted goods under the job work procedure, and whether penalty was sustainable on removal of used capital goods.
Analysis: The capital goods were used during the job work period under Notification No. 214/86-CE, and thereafter the goods were cleared on payment of duty. On these facts, the capital goods could not be treated as having been used exclusively for exempted goods. The clearance of used capital goods was also covered by the Tribunal's earlier view relied upon in the order. The reasoning accepted that goods processed under the job work notification were not to be treated as exempted goods for this purpose, and the cited precedents supported denial of neither credit nor duty demand on the removed used capital goods.
Conclusion: Modvat credit on the capital goods was held admissible, the duty demand on that score failed, and the penalty was set aside.
Final Conclusion: The appeals succeeded and the impugned order was set aside with consequential relief, if any.
Ratio Decidendi: Where capital goods are used both in job-work processing under Notification No. 214/86-CE and in dutiable production, they cannot be regarded as used exclusively for exempted goods so as to deny credit or sustain penalty.