2022 (9) TMI 796

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....02.2011. The said adjudication order has been upheld in Appeal by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), CGST, Kolkata North Commissionerate, vide Order-in-Appeal dated 28.03.2018, which is under challenge in the present Appeal. 2.1 The Appellant is engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods viz, aluminium foil and plates, etc. on which applicable Central Excise Duty is being paid. The Appellant supplied aluminium waste and scrap free of cost to the conversion agents, namely M/s. H. Madanlal (Aluminium) Ltd. and M/s. Premier Metals Products, on principal-to-principal basis for conversion of said goods into aluminium ingot. The said conversion agents were entitled to conversion charges as per the written agreement with the Appellant. Further....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....02.2011 consequent to disallowance of Cenvat Credit. The Appeal filed by the assessee before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) was also rejected against which the assessee is in appeal before me. 3. Sri S.P.Majumdar, Ld.Advocate appeared for the appellant and Sri A.Roy, Ld. Authorised Representative (A.R.) appeared for the Revenue. 4. The Ld. Advocate appearing for the assessee submitted that the bar of credit under Rule 9(1)(b) of the Credit Rules with regard to supplementary invoices is applicable only when the goods are sold by the supplier, which is not the fact herein. He submitted that the present arrangement does not involve any sale of goods by the conversion agent to the assessee appellant. To support his arguments that restric....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 7. I find that the only issue to be decided in this appeal is whether the restrictions from availing credit on the strength of supplementary invoice would apply in terms of Rule 9(1)(b) of the Credit Rules. 8. The Revenue does not dispute the legal position that the aforesaid Rule restricting the credit would not apply in case the credit has been availed on goods which are not sold by the supplier manufacturer, as already decided in the above referred judgements. It is the case of the Revenue that the assessee and the conversion agents are neither related nor sister unit and there is no stock transfer amongst the aforesaid parties. On perusal of Rule 9(1)(b), I find that the bar from availing credit on the supplementary invoice is only....