9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1268X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant-assessee. - Ex. Appeal No.72024/13 - FO/A/76309/16 - Dated:- 16-12-2016 - Shri P. K. Choudhary, Judicial Member Shri V. K. Puri, Advocate for the Appellant Shri K. Choudhary, Supdt. (A.R.) for the Revenue ORDER Per: Shri P. K. Choudhary The appellants were supplied the ingots by M/s SRMB Udyog and after conversion of the said ingots into bar, the same were returned back to the said supplier. It is the submission of the ld.Counsel that during the process of conversion, the appellant i.e. job-worker availed cenvat credit on furnace oil, which is used by the appellants for manufacture of TMT bars of job work. The credit taken on the furnace oil is sought t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MS Ingots. The appellants availed cenvat credit of duty paid on furnace oil. Such availment of credit was objected by the Department for the reason that since no Excise duty was being paid by the appellants on such TMt Bars, sheets and sections, they are entitled to avail cenvat credit in terms of Rule 3 read with Rule 6 of CER, 2002. I find that the period under dispute is from 2005-2006 to 2006-2007 and the credit has been denied to ₹ 14,97,173/- and equal amount of penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944, has been imposed. 4. I find that the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Sterlite Industries (I) Ltd. (supra) held that job-worker received goods from the principal under Rule 57E of the erstwhile ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to be set aside. 4. On the other hand, the learned A.R. relies upon the decision of the Tribunal in Royal Touch Aluminium Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE reported in 2013 (30) S.T.R. 375 (Tri.-Ahmd.) - 2012-TIOL-1573-CESTAT-AHM to say that the appellant is not entitled to take credit. 5. Heard the parties and have gone through the submissions. 6. The main argument of the learned A.R. is on the admissibility of credit on the service tax paid for job worker service but in that case this Tribunal has not held that job worker is not entitled to take credit but in case if the job worker has not taken exemption under Notification No. 8/2005-ST in that case the principal manufacturer is entitled to take Cenvat credit of input services. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
