2002 (8) TMI 605

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rule (1) allow credit to be availed on the duty paid on the inputs which are used in the manufacture of intermediate products received by the manufacturer for use in the manufacture of their final products. The availment of credit under sub-rule (1) of Rule 57J is subject to sub-rule (2) which states that the credit shall be allowed only if the intermediate product is manufactured in the factory in which the exemption benefit in the Notification No. 214/86, dated 25-3-86 has been availed of. (ii) In the instant case, the job workers viz., M/s. Kamet Plastics Ltd., & M/s. Amruta Moulding Pvt. Ltd., from whom M/s. Nestle India Ltd., received the intermediate product, have failed to satisfy the condition under Rule 57J in as much as th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rtinent to note here that the job worker had included the value of wads while discharging the duty liability on caps Assistant Commissioner's contention was that since the goods were sent under Rule 57F(4) directly to the job worker provisions of Rule 57J are attracted. As per the said provisions credit of duty paid on any inputs used by the job worker could be availed only if intermediate products are manufactured in a factory in which the exemption under Notification No. 214/86 is availed. In the instant case the so called job workers M/s. Kamet Plastics and M/s. Amruta Moulding Pvt. Ltd., were not availing exemption under Notification No. 214/86. Hence, Assistant Commissioner held that credit availed by M/s. Nestle India is irregular in ....