9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 543X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f its final product. Further, the issue is covered by the earlier rulings of this Tribunal in the case of Ultratech Cement (2010 (7) TMI 302 - CESTAT, MUMBAI). - Decided against Revenue. - Appeal No.E/307, 568 & 569/09 - - - Dated:- 14-8-2014 - Anil Choudhary, J. For the Appellant : Shri Ashutosh Nath, Assistant Commissioner (AR) For the Respondent : Ms Anjali Hirawat, Adv. JUDGEMENT Per: Shri Anil Choudhary: These appeals are filed by the Revenue against a common order being Order-in-Appeal No. SN/170-171/NGP/2008 dated 23.12.2008 passed the Commissioner of Customs Central Excise (Appeals), Nagpur. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent assessee, M/s. Ambuja Cement Ltd. is a manufacturer of c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 50,000/- The show-cause notice was issued, as it appeared to the Revenue that the civil structural work for ash handling system being situated outside its cement manufacturing plant, hence the CENVAT Credit availed by the assessee on account of services availed with respect to the ash handling system was not permissible and or admissible. Vide Order-in-Original the proposed demand was confirmed along with penalty under Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. Being aggrieved the respondent assessee moved in appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who vide the impugned order was pleased to allow the appeals and set aside the Order-in-Original. 3. Being aggrieved, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... free of cost to small users located within radius of 100 km. and hence it is contended that the fly ash plant is not a captive plant. Further, Revenue has placed reliance on ruling of the Tribunal in the case of Rajhans Metals (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Rajkot, wherein the Tribunal has held that credit of services used at the site of wind mill not located within the factory premises cannot be treated as input service. Thus, it is prayed that the impugned order be set aside. 4. In reply, the learned Counsel for the respondent assessee states that the matter is no more res integra and it is covered by the order dated 07.7.2010 of this Tribunal in the case ofCommissioner of Central Excise Vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd. 2012 (27 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, I find that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the services of Fly Ash Handling Plant set up by the respondent assessee has been used by it in procuring its raw material being flay ash for the purpose of manufacture of its end product being cement. Thus, the expenses incurred at the Handling Plant are in the nature of expenditure for the purpose of manufacture of its end product and in such circumstances, the services availed by the respondent assessee at the fly ash handling plant are inputs services eligible within the meaning of Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 for the purpose of manufacture of its final product. Further, the issue is covered by the earlier two rulings of this Tribunal in the case of Ultratech Cement (s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
