Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Rajesh Aromatics P. Ltd.

Commissioner of Central Excise vs Rajesh Aromatics P. Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Oct 12, 2004

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/36788

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/36788
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: K Kumar
Decided On: Oct 12, 2004
Subject: Excise

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Excise

Key legal issue: Excise

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Central Excise

Respondent

Rajesh Aromatics P. Ltd.

Excerpt

2. the department has come in appeal against the allowance of credit, amounting to rs. 17,166/- on fuel i.e. ldo consumed in the manufacture of job-work. by allowing the credit. the commissioner (appeals) has recorded that he finds that as per rule 57ad of central excise rules, 1944 credit taken on fuel is allowed even though it is used in the manufactured goods. in this regard he has relied on the decision in the case of national engineer inds. ltd. v. cce, jaipur reported in 2002 (52) rlt 1044 (cegat. del) wherein the tribunal has held that job work : lpg used as a fuel by job workers in processing of the inputs received under rule 57f(4) credit not deniable to the job workers as fuel is specifically excluded under rule 57c and rule 57cc; though processed inputs are cleared to principal manufacturer without payment of duty. he has also reduced the penalty from rs. 18,717/- to rs. 1551/- imposed under section 11ac of central excise act, 1944.3. after hearing both sides and perusal of the record. i do not find any reasons to interfere with the order passed by the commissioner (appeals). i, therefore, dismiss the appeal filed by the revenue.

Full Judgment

2. The department has come in appeal against the allowance of credit, amounting to Rs. 17,166/- on fuel i.e. LDO consumed in the manufacture of job-work. By allowing the credit. the Commissioner (Appeals) has recorded that he finds that as per Rule 57AD of Central Excise Rules, 1944 credit taken on fuel is allowed even though it is used in the manufactured goods. In this regard he has relied on the decision in the case of National Engineer Inds. Ltd. v. CCE, Jaipur reported in 2002 (52) RLT 1044 (CEGAT. Del) wherein the Tribunal has held that job work : LPG used as a fuel by job workers in processing of the inputs received under Rule 57F(4) credit not deniable to the job workers as fuel is specifically excluded under Rule 57C and Rule 57CC; though processed inputs are cleared to principal manufacturer without payment of duty. He has also reduced the penalty from Rs. 18,717/- to Rs. 1551/- imposed under Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944.

3. After hearing both sides and perusal of the record. I do not find any reasons to interfere with the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). I, therefore, dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Commissioner of Central Excise vs Rajesh Aromatics P. Ltd. Same Subject Excise Same Judge K Kumar