2018 (2) TMI 1241

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n, Member (Technical) Ms. Surabhi Sinha, Advocate - for the appellant Shri R.K. Mishra, Authorized Representative (DR) - for the respondent ORDER Per. Justice ( Dr. ) Satish Chandra The present appeal is filed against Order-in-Appeal No. 449 (DKV) CE/JPR-I/2010 dated 30/09/2010. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of taper/roller be....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gwith other appellants. The Hon'ble High Court vide its order dated 01/12/2014 has directed the CESTAT to decide the appeal expeditiously. Hence, the present appeal. 3. With the above background, we heard Ms. Surabhi Sinha, learned Counsel for the appellant and Shri R.K. Mishra, learned DR for the Revenue. The learned Counsel submitted the sequence of events as follows :- (i) the taper....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the CVD paid on the re-import. (ii) Department was of the view that the processes which were undertaken on the re-imported taper/roller bearing before clearing of the same to Railways did not amount to manufacture and, hence, there was no need to pay the excise duty on such goods but on the other hand, the Cenvat credit availed at the time of re-import needs to be reversed. Accordingly, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ubjected to several processes but the same were in the nature of repair and refurbishment which cannot be considered as a process of manufacture. Accordingly, when the same goods were cleared to the Railways, the appellant is required to reverse the Cenvat credit availed at the time of return and, hence, he justified the impugned order. 6. After hearing both sides and perusal of record, we find....