2005 (6) TMI 519

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... also declared that they will not use the said goods exclusively for production of final product exempt from whole of excise duty leviable or chargeable to nil rate of duty. Records were maintained. On scrutiny of the records, it was noticed that no raw material  for production of dutiable excisable goods was received and the respondents were engaged in the processing any of inputs/semi processed goods on job work basis received under cover of challans under Rule 57F(4) from another unit. The goods processed were being returned to that unit under Rule 57F(4) challans and no duty was discharged as on removal of the goods from the respondents'  factory exemption  under Notification No.  214/86 was available. A Show Cause N....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rwise till the date of filing of application for cancellation of registration and the Deputy Commissioner denied the credit once again in the de novo proceedings. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) held as Follows : "5. Further the appellant stated that the components manufactured by the appellants on job work basis were used in the manufacture of part & appellants of Motor Vehicles on which duty was paid by ACGL. The appellants have the choice to pay duty on the goods manufactured out of the raw material supplied and therefore appellants could have paid duty on the components manufactured and supplied to ACGL in view of the various decisions of the Tribunal and in such a situation they could have utilized the credit on the capit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 331 (T) = 1997 (22) RLT 165 held that the credit could not be denied since Rule 57C considered by the Tribunal in the case of Bajaj Tempo Ltd and Notification No. 214/85 and No. 217/86 were similar and rule 57C were para materia Rule 57R and ANGL who are manufacturing dutiable final product would be entitled to the credit of capital goods in terms of Rule 57S (5). He therefore allowed the assessee's appeal, setting aside the order of the Deputy Commissioner passed in remand.  Hence this appeal by Revenue. 2. Revenue has taken following grounds : (i) The Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in concluding that Notification Nos. 217/86 and No. 214/86 and Rule 57C para materia. Rule 57R has not taken into account. The provisio....