2015 (10) TMI 126

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r 38 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, through their two unit namely Unit-1 and Unit-2. On 17.09.2007, Central Excise officers of preventive unit visited Unit-1 of the appellant's factory and found that the Unit-1 transferred the Pesticides to Unit-2 on payment of duty at tariff rate. According to the Revenue, Unit-1 should pay the duty on the basis of CAS-4. Accordingly, Unit-1 paid the duty on the basis of CAS-4 and issued the supplementary invoices to Unit-2, who availed CENVAT credit on the basis of supplementary invoices issued by Unit-1. In the present case, the adjudicating authority denied the CENVAT credit availed by Unit -2 on the basis of supplementary invoices as in violation of Rule 9(1)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Daman vs. Manglam Drugs & Organics Limited - 2007 (208) ELT 95 (Tri. Mumbai). He submits that both the cases are related to denial of CENVAT credit availed on the basis of supplementary invoices issued on the allegation of fraud, misstatement etc. 5. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the record, I find that the Preventive Officers during their visit detected the transfer of goods from Unit-1 to Unit-2 on the payment of duty on tariff rate. According to the department, the Unit-1 should have paid duty on CAS-4. The appellant immediately paid the differential duty and issued supplementary invoices and Unit-2 availed the cenvat credit on the basis of supplementary invoices. 6. The co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... on the basis of supplementary invoices issued by manufacturer factory from where the goods are sold by, or on behalf of the said manufacturer. In the present case, admittedly, there is no sale of goods but It is inter unit transfer of stock. It is seen that Unit-1 transferred the goods to their Unit-2. I find that this issue is settled by the decision of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Jairaj Ispat (supra). Relevant portion of the said decision is reproduced below:- "5. On a perusal of the material available on record and the order impugned, it is apparent that one unit of the respondent-company manufacturers ingots and sends them to rerolling, division for further conversion to re-rolled products of various siz....