2010 (6) TMI 224

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o as unit I, unit II, unit Ill & unit IV. Units I, II & III fall under the jurisdiction of same range/division coming under Kolkata-III Commissionerate. Unit IV comes under a different Commissionerates namely Haldia Commissionerate. Unit II falling under Kolkata-III Commissionerate is having facility for casting. Unit I, III and IV of the Appellant company were receiving duty paid inputs like pig iron, iron scrap and took credit under Rules 57AB and later under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2001 and Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The unit II of the Appellant company using the said inputs received from other units manufactured CI Valves, Cl.  pipes and pipe fittings. Unit II has cleared the said final products without payment of duty to the unit whi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nputs for the purpose of undertaking job work through their sister unit namely unit II. It is his submission that Rule 57AC(5)(a) of the Central Excise Rules 1944 clearly envisaged removal of inputs on which credit has been taken for the purpose of processing or any other purpose to a job-worker and bringing back the same to the units from which Cenvatable materials were removed. The fact that job-worker was not a legal entity independent from the supplying units is of no consequence. He submits that the benefit available when the same inputs were removed to a third party cannot be denied when the same is removed to another unit of the same manufacturer, being the same legal entity. He also submits that the provisions of Rule 4(5)(a) of Cen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nit is also liable to duty unless specifically exempted. In other words, each of the unit is treated, for all practical purposes, as if an independent company for the purpose of levy, exemption, extending of CENVAT Credit etc. in accordance with law. The present dispute, requires to be issued in the above context. 8. On perusal of the order of the Commissioner, it is not in dispute that unit I, III and IV of the Appellant company have received duty paid inputs and taken credit. They have undisputedly removed the same inputs after taking per mission of the jurisdictional central excise authorities for the purpose of processing as envisaged under Rule 57AC(5)(a) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and later under Rule 4(5)(a) of the Cenvat C....