Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.01 seconds)
Documents citing Facit Asia Limited vs Collector Of Central Excise on 21 February, 1994

Central Capacitors Co. Pvt. Ltd vs Nagpur on 23 February, 2011

6. Further, in the case of Facit Asia Ltd. vs. Collector of Central Excise 1991 (54) ELT 347 the Madras Bench of the Tribunal held that modvat credit cannot be denied to a manufacturer just because his job-workers paid duty on the intermediate components under the normal procedure instead of returning them to the manufacturer without payment of duty under the provisions of Notification No. 214/86. The Tribunal further held that the job-worker cannot be forced to avail the benefit of Notification No. 214/86 and the choice is with him in regard to availment of the benefit of Notification.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

L And T Komatsu Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 10 December, 2004

In the case of Facit Asia Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise -1991 (54) E.L.T. 347 (Madras - CEGAT), the Tribunal has held that the input credit is not deniable to the manufacturer just because the job worker paid duty on the intermediate component on the normal procedure in respect of returning to them without payment of duty. It was also brought to our notice that the Department is taking contradictory stands in respect of different assessees. The appellant submitted that in one case, the department has issued show cause notice to the job worker demanding excise duty for not including the value of the goods received from the principle manufacturer, whereas in the present case, the Department even objects to the job worker paying central excise duty. In view of our findings above, we hold that the appellant has not violated any provisions of the act or Rules in availing Modvat credit of duty paid by the job worker on the goods returned to the appellants. Hence we allow the appeal with consequential relief.
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Bangalore Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Dinesh Pharmaceuticals P. Ltd. vs Cce And C on 1 January, 1998

2. The Ld. Counsel Shri J.C. Patel submits that the issue in these appeals is relating to availing of Modvat credit by the manufacturer who has sent out the input material to job work under Rule 57F(2) of Central Excise Rules where the job worker has returned the processed material to the main manufacturer after paying duty on the same. He submitted that the matter now stands settled by the decision of the Southern Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Facit Asia v. Collector . In that case the Tribunal addressed itself to the issue where in case the job worker pays the duty whether in such a situation should the manufacturer assessee be held to be falling outside the purview of Rule 57F(2). The Tribunal held that:
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1