Gujarat High Court
Principal Commissioner vs Sarabhai Chemicals....Opponent on 21 June, 2016
Author: A.Y. Kogje
Bench: S.R.Brahmbhatt, A.Y. Kogje
O/TAXAP/471/2016 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
TAX APPEAL NO. 471 of 2016
==============================================================
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER....Appellant
Versus
SARABHAI CHEMICALS....Opponent
==============================================================
Appearance:
MR GAURANG H BHATT, ADVOCATE for the Appellant
==============================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
Date : 21/06/2016
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE) This Appeal is challenging the order dated 01.09.2015 in Appeal No. E/1269/2007 by CESTAT, WZB, Ahmedabad. The assessee had imported Penicillin G- Potassium on payment of duty and this raw material was sent on one M/s. Tini Pharma Ltd. (job worker) for conversion to Amoxicillin Tryhydrate IP under the erstwhile Rule 57F(2) and 57F(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.
It is the case of the revenue department that the job worker, which was a SSI unit, had purposely adopted the procedure of passing on the accumulated credit which otherwise would have lapsed at the end of financial year. Though, the job worker was liable to pay duty only on conversion charges and not on full intrinsic value of the goods. Hence, Admitted.
Page 1 of 2
HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Thu Jun 23 03:16:20 IST 2016
O/TAXAP/471/2016 ORDER
Following substantial questions of law are
framed;
(i) Whether in the facts and the
circumstances of the case the Tribunal is justified to hold that the Modvat Credit is admissible on processed input/intermediate product (manufactured out of inputs/raw material supplied under challan, issued under the erstwhile Rule 57F(2)/57F(3) of Central Excise Rules, 1944 by the respondent) cleared under the cover of invoices on payment of duty by the job worker or not ?
(ii) Whether in the facts and the circumstances of the case the procedure prescribed under the erstwhile Rule 57F(2)/57F(3) of Central Excise Rules, 1944, can be applied in piecemeal or the procedure laid down by said rule has to be applied in totality ?
(iii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, once the assessee adopts the procedure prescribed under Rule 57F(2)/57F(3) of the Central Excise Rules, can assessee deviate from such procedure and adopts a different procedure ?
(S.R.BRAHMBHATT, J.) (A.Y. KOGJE, J.) Pankaj Page 2 of 2 HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Thu Jun 23 03:16:20 IST 2016