Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2010 (4) TMI 945

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oms, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal has accepted the appeal of the respondent-assessee M/s. J.B. Fashions Limited (for short "the assessee"). 2. the essential facts, relevant for disposal of present appeal and emanating from the record, are that the assessee was engaged in the manufacture of Zipper rolls and is registered with the Central Excise Department. The Central-Excise Officers of Arni Evasion Branch visited and checked the factory premises of the assessee on 14-12-2001. The revenue claimed that during the course of checking, inter alia, it revealed that the assessee had wrongly availed the Cenvat credit on the strength of invoices of the duty paid on "partially oriented yarn". Consequently, a show cause notice was issu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Modvat/Cenvat credit, ordered its recovery alongwith interest, confirmed the demand of duty of shortage of Cenvat raw material imposed the penalty under the Cenvat Rules, vide impugned order dated 5-8-2004 (Annexure A1). 5. Aggrieved by the order (Annexure A1), the assessee filed the appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, which was accepted vide impugned order (Annexure A2). 6. The revenue did not feel satisfied with the impugned order (Annexure A2) and filed the present appeal, which was admitted to consider the following substantial question of law :- "Whether the CESTAT is correct in interpreting Rule '57(AB)(2)(c) while holding that the manufacturer-.is] not an independent processors and allow....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....teners, the assessee is required to send certain inputs to the job worker for intermediate job processing, which are further used in its factory for manufacture of final product of Zipper Fasteners. Meaning thereby, the assessee is neither clearing the texturised yarn nor it is texturising the partially oriented yarn. It provides certain inputs for intermediate job process to job worker and after texturising the same," the inputs were received by the assessee in its factory for further use in the manufacture of final product (Zipper rolls), which were cleared on payment of duty. In that eventuality, it cannot possibly be said that the assessee is an independent texturiser or cleared the texturised yarn at concessional rate of duty, as urged....