2018 (4) TMI 1230

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng activity was done as a job worker, but the goods were supplied on payment of duty on sale basis back to BIL. The entire raw materials required for the manufacture was supplied by BIL, the appellants availed credit of the duty paid by BIL on such raw materials and cleared the manufactured products back to BIL on payment of duty by adjustment against the Cenvat credit and payment by cash. The period under dispute is April 2005 to March 2009. SCN dated 06.09.2009 was issued, proposing recovery of differential duty by redetermining the value of the goods manufactured by the appellants for payment of duty under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules. Demand amounting to Rs. 49,09,387/- stands confirmed in the impugned order along with i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... goods have been returned. Consequently, the allegation of suppression stated by Revenue in the impugned order, for invoking the longer period of limitation under Section 11 A is not justified. 3. We have heard both sides and perused the records. 4. The raw materials are supplied by the principal manufacturer BIL to the appellants. After carrying out the manufacturing activity, the goods are cleared back to BIL who used such goods for further manufacture at their end. Since this is not a case of the principal manufacturer immediately selling the goods manufactured by the appellants, Rule 10A of the Central Excise Valuation Rules will have no application in the facts of the present case. The duty payable by the appellant on the intermediat....