9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 626X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l No.ST/87678/13 - - - Dated:- 24-7-2014 - Anil Choudhary, J. For the Appellant : Shri Bharat Raichandani, Adv. For the Respondent : Shri B K Iyer, Supdt. (AR) JUDGEMENT Per: Anil Choudhary: The appellant, M/s APM Terminals India Pvt. Ltd. (formerly known as Maersk India Pvt. Ltd.) is operator of Container Freight Stations (CFS). The appellant have two separate Containers Freight Stations, one of which known as CFS Annex and other is known as CFS Sector -2 . The appellant provides services to importers and exporters mainly under the heading Cargo Handling Service', which includes various services like, stuffing, maintenance of containers, loading and unloading of containers and other like activities. The ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he finding that the appellants have erred in taking the CENVAT Credit on manpower supply and supply of tangible goods services for the purpose of reversal with respect to its export turnover of services for the purpose of reversal with respect to its export turnover of services. Being aggrieved the appellant carried the matter before the Commissioner (Appeals), who was pleased to dismiss the appeal. The Commissioner (Appeals) framed the issue involved as to whether the appellant had correctly reversed the CENVAT Credit as per Rule 6 (3) of the Cenvat Credit as per Rule 6(3) (A) of the Cenvat Credit Rules and recorded the finding that the appellant have filed a centralized return and have opted not to maintain separate account for exempted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er of Central Excise, Mumbai III 1999 (112) ELT 653(Tri), wherein in respect of clearance of goods for export purpose duty was held not payable, the clearance being covered under sub-rule (3) of proviso to Rule 9(1) and clause (4) of being 49 of Central Excise Rules, 1944. It was held that distinction between such exemption under Rule 8 continues undisturbed irrespective of the quantity of the rebate. The goods exported under Rule 13 and by virtue of explanation (2) to this rule goods cleared for making the yarn exported cannot therefore be considered to be goods exempted from payment of duty. The appellant further relies on the ruling of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Repro India Ltd. 2009 (235) ELT 614 (Bom), wherein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the goods are exempted and, therefore, attract Rule 6(1) would be incorrect and completely nullify and frustrate Rule 6(6)(v). 4. The learned Supdt. (AR) appearing for the Revenue relies on the impugned order. He further draws my attention to the fact that the appellant has suo motu applied the formula under Rule 6(3)(2) read with Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules and accordingly, the amount disallowed by the impugned order is correct and justified. 5. Having considered the rival contentions, I find that the appellant have no other exempted service except being attributable to export i.e. services rendered for facilitating export which are not taxable by virtue of export. Therefore, I find that no reversal is required under the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
