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 Cenvat credit was admissible on duty-paid wire rods received in the factory and processed by drawing into wire, when the activity was alleged not to amount to manufacture, and whether the export clearances affected the entitlement.
Analysis: Credit was denied only on the premise that drawing of wire from a thicker to a thinner gauge did not amount to manufacture. Rule 16 of the Central Excise Rules permits credit of duty paid on goods brought to the factory for re-making, refining, re-conditioning or for any other reason, and contemplates subsequent clearance on payment of duty equivalent to the credit availed. The transactions in question were covered by that rule for the relevant period to the extent applicable, and for the earlier period the goods were cleared after processing for export under bond. Since the goods were not cleared into the domestic market without duty and the duty paid on receipt of inputs was appropriately accounted for, the credit was held to be legally admissible.
Conclusion: Cenvat credit was held admissible and the Revenue's challenge failed.
Final Conclusion: The impugned order allowing credit was sustained and the Revenue appeal was rejected.
Ratio Decidendi: Credit on duty-paid goods brought into a factory remains admissible under Rule 16 where the goods are processed and cleared in accordance with the rule or exported under bond, even if the processing does not amount to manufacture.