TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (6) TMI 773
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - As per facts on record, the appellant is engaged in manufacture of auto parts. They were placed a contract by M/s. Gujarat Setco Cluth Ltd., Halol (hereinafter referred to as GSCL) for manufacture and delivery of the clutch cover at a price of Rs. 417.50 per piece. The appellants manufactured clutch covers and raised the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e appellant's factory was clutch covers welded with driving lugs. Accordingly, the demand of duty of Rs. 1,60,284/- was raised against the appellant for the period March 2002 to June 2002 by raising a show cause notice on 17-2-04, by invoking longer period of limitation. The said demand stand confirmed by the authorities below along with imposition of penalty and confirmation of interest. 3.&emsp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... burden. As such, instead of actually clearing the clutch covers, the appellants did the job work on the same and returned the goods to GSCL. The job work was done under the cover of challan under Rule 4(5)(a) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. It is not a case where the lugs were supplied free of cost by GSCL so as to be attached and welded to the clutch cover, in which case, their value was required ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... taking note of the provisions of Rule 57F of the erstwhile CER, 1994, value of the input supplied by the manufacturer of the final product to intermediate product producer, was held as not includible in the value of the final product. 6. Apart from the above, we also find that the demand is barred by limitation. The movements of the driving lugs were under the cover of challan and in terms ....