TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (9) TMI 630
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under Chapter 8703 availing Modvat Credit on inputs and capital goods under Rule 57(A) or 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Dy. Commissioner of Central Excise Division, disallowed the total credit of Rs. 71,11,402/- (Rs. 6,06,916 + RS.20,49,883 + Rs. 44,54,604) and also imposed penalty under Rule 173Q, vide three Order-in-Original Nos. 65,66 & 68/2003 dated 27/8/03, 28/8/03 and 29/8/03 respectively. The respondents preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Lower Appellate Authority vide O-in-A Nos. 33 to 35/2004 dated 24.06.2004 set aside all the three O-in-Os and allowed the appeals. Hence, the Revenue filed the present appeals. 3. Heard both sides. 4. The Ld. AR of the Revenue reiterates the grounds of appeal and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appellate authority. He further submits that they have issued 57F4 challans to the job worker only after reversing the credit and the final credit was availed only on receipt of the goods from the job workers. The original duty paying documents issued by the principal supplier of the goods were in the name of M/s. Hyundai Motors Ltd. The Ld. Advocate relied on the following decisions as under:- 1. CCE, Kolkata - Patton Electro Ltd. 2009 (248) ELT 380 (Tri.-Kol.) 2. Ford India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Asst. Commissioner of CE 2011 (272) ELT 353 (Mad.)  ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng the non-receipt of inputs to the respondent's factory but was directly supplied from the principle supplier to the job workers premises. For better understanding the sequence of movement of inputs from the principal supplier to the job workers and to the respondents the relevant para (5) at page 2 of the impugned order is reproduced as under:- That the inputs had occasioned the movement from the premises of M/s. POS Hyundai to JBM Sungwood Ltd. On getting the information, appellants would first reverse the credit equivalent to the amount involved in the transaction of delivery between M/s. POS Hyundai and JBM Sungwood Ltd. In other words, appellants sub....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rkers, and all transactions of movement & receipt are maintained by the respondents. The original payment of duty on the inputs made by the principal manufacturer, the duty paying documents is in the name of respondents and the final receipt of the goods from the job workers to the respondents factory is not disputed by the Department. It is relevant to state that the substantial condition for availing modvat credit on inputs under the provisions of 57A or 57Q of CER is (1) evidence of duty payment of inputs (2) receipt of the inputs and (3) usage of the inputs in the excisable goods. In the present case, all the three conditions have been satisfied. Though the goods have been directly supplied from the principal manufacturer to the job wo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nbsp; 8. Reverting to the facts of the case, there is not any dispute that the inputs in question were not supplied by the manufacturer through any inter-mediator but they were supplied to the appellants, but the delivery was at the place of job worker of the appellants. It is not in dispute that the invoices in relation to the inputs were in favour of the appellants and the payments there under was made by the appellants. Being so, in our considered opinion, the appellants had fulfilled the condition 4 of the said Notification. Mere physical delivery of the goods at the instance of the appellants at a place of job worker cannot be sufficient to treat that the goods were not supplied to the appellants directly. The above decision squ....