2018 (5) TMI 87
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s, namely, "Hydraulic Cylinders" and "Hydraulic Power Pack" claimed to have been received from M/s Faraday Shop, reflected the receipt timing earlier to the clearance of the same goods by M/s Alpha Nippon Innovative Ltd. to M/s Electrotherm (India) Ltd., after undertaking necessary manufacturing activity in their premises. On investigation, it was revealed that the appellant had neither received the input nor carried out any manufacturing activity on "Hydraulic Cylinders" and "Hydraulic Power Pack" but raised invoices with little value addition, in the name of M/s Electrotherm (India) Ltd. The said inputs were directly delivered in the premises of M/s Electrotherm (India) Ltd., by the input-manufacturer M/s Faraday Shop and M/s Electrotherm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Excise Rules, 2002. Aggrieved by the said order, they filed appeals before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), who in turn, rejected their appeals. Hence, the present appeals. 3. Ld. Advocate Sh. S.J. Vyas for the appellant fairly submits that M/s Alpha Nippon Innovative Ltd. has discontinued manufacturing activity of Hydraulic Cylinders and "Hydraulic Power Pack" w.e.f. 10.05.2006, however, to continue their supply chain of the said goods to M/s Electrotherm (India) Ltd., they purchased the said goods from M/s Faraday Shop and instead of bringing it to their factory, got it delivered out and out at the factory premises of M/s Electrotherm (India) Ltd. Also necessary testing of those items were carried out in the premises of M/s Electrotherm ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....elevant Rules in availing and passing on the credit, penal provision is attracted against the Appellants. 4. Per contra, Ld. AR for the Revenue, on the other hand, has submitted that no doubt on the same items, namely, Hydraulic Cylinders" and "Hydraulic Power Pack" cleared from the factory of M/s Faraday Shop, during the period April '06 to December '06, duty has been paid and accordingly credit could be admissible, to one of the party, but it was not clear whether the said items were used in or in relation to manufacture of the finished goods, therefore, the demand was issued to M/s Alpha Nippon Innovative Ltd. for recovery of the credit wrongly availed without receiving the inputs in their factory, and the demand was also issued to M/s ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e manufacture of finished goods, hence credit cannot be denied to M/s Electrotherm (India) Ltd.. The Ld. Advocate has fairly accepted that it was an error on the part of M/s Alpha Nippon Innovative Ltd., to first avail credit on the input invoices issued by M/s Faraday Shop, and raise further sales invoices on inputs with some value addition and pass the enhanced duty to their customer M/s Electrotherm (India) Ltd.,. But, there is no double credit of the duty paid by the input manufacturer M/s Faraday Shop either at the end of M/s Alpha Nippon Innovative Ltd. or by M/s Electrotherm (India) Ltd. It is his contention that therefore the demand on M/s Alpha Nippon Innovative Ltd. for recovery of the credit wrongly availed cannot be sustai....
TaxTMI
TaxTMI