2016 (5) TMI 1073

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....MASUB RAMA NIAN, J) The Revenue has come up with the above appeals, raising the substantial questions of law which reads as under; C.M.A.No.3148 of 2007: "Inasmuch as the inputs in question were procured solely for the purpose of export and such inputs were not used in or in relation to the manufacture of the finished goods of the assessee/respondent, whether the Tribunal is correct in allowing the credit of duty with reference to Rule 6 of CENVAT Credit Rules?" C.M.A.No.2431 of 2008: "1. Whether the CESTAT is correct in holding that the impugned goods became fully manufactured goods in the premises of the appellants particularly when the appellant had admittedly done only testing and packing of the goods in their premises, w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hey send the goods to the assessee again on payment of duty. The value adopted at that time by KTTM Ltd was the initial value adopted by the assessee plus the painting charges. This duty paid invoice is handed over by KTTM to the assessee and the assessee takes CENVAT Credit. The assessee thereafter does testing, packing of goods and clears the same for export under bond without payment of Central Excise Duty. 4. While the aforesaid activities constitute basic facts out of which one appeal arise, a different set of facts constitute the foundation for the other appeal. What happened in the other case was that the assessee manufactured rough iron castings and cleared them on payment of duty to a company called Real Talent Engineering Priva....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed 7.11.2015 was issued proposing to reverse the CENVAT Credit on the ground that the assessee received inputs upon payment of duty from KTTM Limited and took CENVAT Credit. These goods were exported under bond after inspection, testing and packing. This show cause notice resulted in an order in original dated 28.2.2007. This order was reversed on an appeal filed by the assessee in A.No.418 of 2007 dated 16.7.2007. As against this order, the Department has come up with C.M.A.No.2431 of 2008. 10. From the above narration of facts, it is clear that out of a common order dated 28.5.2007 passed by the Tribunal, in two appeals, Appeal No.793 of 2005 and Appeal No.232 of 2005, the Department has chosen to file one single appeal in C.M.A.No.314....