TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (11) TMI 143
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t directly sent to M/s. Pearl Polymers Limited. However, appellant took credit of duty paid on corrugated boxes manufactured by M/s. Corru Cartons (I) Pvt. Ltd. and sent directly to M/s. Pearl Polymers Ltd. for using the same to pack pet bottles. While clearing the goods, M/s. Pearl Polymers paid duty on the pet bottles manufactured by them and in the invoice showed the value of corrugated boxes and added the cost of bottles to arrive at the assessable value, since corrugated boxes had been supplied free of cost by the appellant. On the ground that appellant has taken credit of duty paid on corrugated boxes twice, proceedings were initiated which culminated into demand of cenvat credit of Rs. 89,572/-, being the cenvat credit availed on cor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....end, duty was paid on corrugated boxes by the pet bottle manufacturers, and the credit had already been taken by the appellant when corrugated boxes were supplied by the pet bottle manufacturers and therefore, according to him, this amounts to double benefit which is not admissible. 3. I have considered the submissions made by both sides. On going through the invoices issued by pearl pet bottle manufacturer and corrugated boxes manufacturer, I find that corrugated boxes manufacturer had paid duty on corrugated boxes and the pearl pet bottle manufacturer had paid duty on the pet bottles. Value of corrugated boxes was shown separately to make it clear that value of goods supplied by the buyer free has been added. In any case, according ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that is not the position. In the case of MDS Switchgear, Hon'ble Supreme Court upheld the view that rules entitle the recipient manufacturer to avail of the benefit of the duty paid by the supplier manufacturer. In any case, appellants have taken credit of duty paid by them to the suppliers. There is no finding that the credit of duty taken by the appellant was not paid by them to the suppliers or suppliers had not paid duty, which was shown as duty in their invoice. If the credit has been taken twice, first time on the corrugated boxes themselves and second time as part of pet bottles being the packing materials, it cannot be said that appellants have benefited in any manner and further, as already stated, it cannot be said that credit ha....