9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 745X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s to be remanded to the Ld. Commissioner who would examine the eligibility of CENVAT Credit availed on GTA Services, for bringing the inputs inside the factory which were later cleared, as such, without reversal of proportionate CENVAT Credit on such input service - The applicant directed to deposit an amount of Rs. 20.00 Lakhs as pre-deposit – upon such submission rest of the duty to be waived till the disposal – Partial stay granted Clearance of Manganese Ore from factory without reversal of SAD - Held that:- The Manganese Ore had been cleared from the mixed stock of imported as well as indigenous goods were only imported Manganese Ore - It is the claim of the Appellant that even though these were imported as well as indigenous stock, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he ground that part of the inputs being cleared as such, hence, the proportionate Service Tax credit availed on the GTA Services attributable to the inputs cleared as such, since not used in the manufacture of finished goods, required to be reversed. The Ld. Advocate has further submitted that the issue is now no more res integra and covered by the judgement of this Tribunal and Punjab Haryana High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh-I vs. Punjab Steels - 2010 (260) E.L.T. 521 (P H). 2.1. Regarding the second component of the demand of Rs.2,44,82,730/, the Ld. Advocate has submitted that the demand has been issued on the ground that while removing around 42,000 M.T. of imported input, namely, Manganese Ore, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... blished that the inputs Manganese Ore cleared from the factory of the Applicant to their sister units had not been placed before the Ld. Commissioner for verification/scrutiny. The Ld. Advocate made a fair offer to deposit around Rs. 20.00 Lakhs. 3. The Ld. A.R. for the Revenue has submitted that the Applicant had failed to establish that the input Manganese Ore cleared from their factory to their units as such were only stocks of the indigenous Manganese Ore. The Ld. A.R. submitted that on a quick glance of the records produced by the Ld. Advocate, it could be said that at certain point of time the stock of the Manganese Ore fell below the indigenous stocks on that date which shows that imported Manganese Ore were also cleared as such al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have cleared Manganese Ore from their indigenous stock only. When we examined the record we find that the quantity of 16952.665 M.T. though pertains to the period prior to import of the Manganese Ore, but wrongly included in the demand. The Ld. Advocate fairly conceded before us that the said plea was not taken before the Ld. adjudicating authority. We also after going through the observation of the Ld. Commissioner find that the said findings are general in nature and no specific finding has been recorded whereby the Appellant failed to establish that the Manganese Ore cleared by them, as such, were pertaining only from indigenous sources. Also, we find force in the argument of the Ld. A.R. that the Ld. Commissioner could not examine the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
