Lear Automotive (India) Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (CESTAT Mumbai)
In a recent appeal before the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) Mumbai, M/s Lear Automotive (India) Pvt Ltd contested a demand of ₹19,16,372 under Rule 14 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The dispute revolved around the removal of ‘epoxy moulds’ to a manufacturer of ‘parts of automobile’ seats and their subsequent return for final assembly into finished products. The jurisdictional central excise authorities argued that the removal of moulds rendered the credit taken ineligible under Rule 3(5) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.
Key Points and Arguments:
Rule 4(5)(b) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004:
- The appellant invoked Rule 4(5)(b), which allows CENVAT credit for jigs, fixtures, moulds, and dies sent by a manufacturer of final products to another manufacturer or a job worker for production on his behalf.
- The appellant asserted that the amendment to Rule 4(5)(b) with effect from 27th February 2010, through notification no. 6/2010-CE(NT), clarified the eligibility for credit in such cases.
Job-Worker Status:
- The appellant contended that their vendors used the epoxy moulds in the manufacture of parts supplied to them. They argued that the vendors qualified as job-workers, and the eligibility for credit was not in doubt.
- Reference was made to various judicial decisions, including Monica Electronics, Whirlpool of India Ltd cases, and a letter from the Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC).
Definition of Job-Work:
Paid content
Become a Basic or Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Basic or Premium member.
