Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 2]

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

M/S. Dresser Valves India Pvt. Ltd vs Cce, Coimbatore on 25 September, 2015

        

 
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH, CHENNAI

Appeal Nos. E/42361 & 42364/2013

(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal Nos.275 & 276/2013 dated 27.8.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Coimbatore)

M/s. Dresser Valves India Pvt. Ltd.			Appellant

      
      Vs.


CCE, Coimbatore					        Respondent

Appearance Shri M. Karthikeyan, Advocate, for the Appellant Shri B. Balamurugan, AC (AR) for the Respondent CORAM Honble Shri D.N. Panda, Judicial Member Date of Hearing / Decision: 25.09.2015 Final Order No. 41286-41287 / 2015 There is no dispute between the parties as to the extent of re-warehousing certificate issued by the Department, copy of which is available at page 45 & 46 of appeal folder, when part of the goods in a consignment was returned back by the appellant finding that to be defective. Appellant says that such defective goods were considered to be returned back to the supplier in terms of proviso to Rule 6 of the Central Excise (Removal of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods), Rules 2001.

2. Revenue disputes to the return of the goods.

3. Heard both sides and perused the records as well as the rules concerned.

4. When there is a mandate in terms of the proviso to Rule 6 of the aforesaid Rules, the appellant cannot be denied to the benefit of return of the goods either for replacement or for any account adjustment. Even though pages 45 & 46 establishes the return of the goods it is not able to show that the goods were replaced by the supplier. Learned DR at this stage points out that the supplies were from different place and re-warehousing at different places. All such aspect needs verification. Therefore, matter is remanded to adjudicating authority to conduct an enquiry as to receipt of the material by the appellant as replacement of the returned material. If so he shall pass appropriate order granting fair opportunity of hearing to the appellant. (Dictated and pronounced in open court) (D.N. Panda) Judicial Member Rex 2