SYSCHEM (INDIA) LTD. Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Counsel Shri Bajaj submits that in both the appeals, there is a common question involved for which there was a common order passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) reversing the adjudication order. The appellants being a job worker, claimed before the learned adjudicating authority that it had used certain inputs in the job worked goods and the job worked goods upon being processed were being cleared without payment of duty. That point is not disputed being well evidenced from letter by M/s DSM Anti -Infectives India Pvt. Ltd. issued on 18.3.2004. A copy of this letter is at page 44 of the Appeal Folder. Learned Adjudicating Authority considering that the job worked goods were not sale but mere exchange/movement of semi -finished goods between raw material supplier and the job worker through challans under Rules and the appellant having already reversed the Modvat credit availed on the raw materials, there shall be no demand of 8% of the total price.

(2.) Being aggrieved by the decision of the learned Adjudicating Authority, Revenue went in appeal to the learned Commissioner (Appeals) who held that Rule 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 does not permit the appellant to enjoy cenvat credit in respect of job worked goods being exempted from duty.

(3.) But learned DR supporting order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) submits that when the exempted goods were cleared by the appellants, Revenue has not fetched duty. Therefore, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly decided the issue against the appellant for realization of 8% amount of sales price.