2021 (10) TMI 701

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e, along with interest and penalty is assailed in the appeal. 2. Facts of the case in brief is that Appellant M/s. Mechasoft is a manufacturer of excisable goods and also a job worker. During the course of audit of the records of the appellant it was noticed that from July 2012 to December 2016 appellant had availed Cenvat credit against job work activity, which is an exempted service, and not maintained separate record for which as per Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 an amount of Rs. 29,44,907/-, @ 6 per cent / 7 per cent on the amount of Rs. 4,79,60,807/- received by it for its job work charges, was demanded through a show cause notice that was confirmed in the adjudication process and appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-Original No. KLHEXCUS- 000-COM-007-19-20, dated 11.09.2019 passed in the case of M/s. Indus Ferro Tech Ltd., Order-in-Original No.29/CEX/JC/KOP/2018-19 dated 07.01.2019 passed in the case of M/s. Baramati Specialty Steels Ltd., Order-in-Original No.PII/ADC/VNT/CEX/50/2015, dated 29.10.2015 passed in the case of M/s. JBM MA Automotive Pvt. Ltd., Order-in Original No. PII/CEX/VSP/DIVN-III (CKN-1)/21/2015, dated 08.09.2015 passed in the case of M/s. JBM MA Automotive Pvt. Ltd, he further argued that it has been consistently held by the Tribunal that job work activity carried out in terms of Notification o. 214/86-CE (NT) cannot be treated as exempted service for which the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) confirming the duty demand etc. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dated 16.09.2002 so as to make the manufacturer accountable for discharging his obligation in respect of goods under Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. As such when the notification was made service was not treated as an taxable incident in India and the said notification has clearly excluded job workers from the purview of payment of excise duty if ultimate manufacturer was to pay the duty at the time of clearance. Therefore, this amendment of 2005 since has only fixed manufacturer liable to comply with Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, to my considered view, job worker cannot be asked to comply the same again on the ground that he is also a part of the manufacturing process. Further, Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 introduced....