2017 (5) TMI 332

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....CEW tubes on job work basis. The tubes were then brought back to the factory and subjected to further processes. The appellant adopted the procedure where the HR/CR coils purchased and sent directly from the suppliers to the job workers, viz., Progressive Steel Processors, Taloja where the process of slitting was carried out and then sent to another job worker viz., Arihant Domestic Appliances Pvt. Ltd., Sanaswadi, Pune for tube making. After the process, the tubes were returned back. It was observed that there was no record of movement of goods and it appears that slitted coils had not been received back in the factory and therefore, Cenvat credit amounting to Rs. 6,98,352/- availed on the HR/CR coils was not admissible. Further, in some c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eved by the order-in-original, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who vide order-in-appeal No.RKR(233)/53/07 dated 22/10/2007 dismissed the appeal for failure to make the pre-deposit of the amount of Rs. 12.84 lakhs. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant preferred an appeal before the CESTAT. The CESTAT vide it s order dated 14/02/2008 allowed their appeal by way of remand to the Commissioner. In the remand proceedings, the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal filed by the appellant. Therefore, being aggrieved by the said impugned order, the appellant has filed the present appeal. 2. Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the goods were sent for job wor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ve observed that since the second copy of the challan was not available, the appellant have tried to fabricate the said challans, that itself shows the manipulation on the part of the appellant which proves that the job worked goods was not returned back to their factory and therefore, the demand was rightly confirmed. 4. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. I find that the issue is in a narrow compass that whether the job work goods on which the Cenvat credit was availed by the appellant was returned back from the job worker or otherwise. The revenue has relied upon the fact that in case of 53 challans, the green copy of the challan was not returned by the job worker. As regards the job work procedure prev....