9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1329X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... extended period is correctly invoked as the appellant has followed the self assessment procedure and are taking credit on their own. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant-assessee. - ST/26822/2013 & ST/26824 to 26830/2013 - FINAL ORDER Nos. 21286 to 21293/2016 - Dated:- 23-11-2016 - Shri S.S Garg, Judicial Member Mr. Karthikeyan L.S., Advocate - For the Appellants Mr. Mohammed Yusuf, A.R.- For Respondent ORDER The appellants have filed eight appeals against the impugned order dated 7.3.2013 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide which he disposed of all the eight appeals by a common order. The issue in all these appeals is identical and, therefore, all the eight appeals are being disposed of by this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acts of the present case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture and clearance of excisable goods falling under Chapter 85 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They are also providing various taxable output services defined under Section 65(105) of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellants are mainly engaged in supply, erection and installation of electrical equipment of various agencies like State Electricity Boards, National Thermal Power Corporations, Delhi Metro Rail Corporation, Damodar Valley Corporation, Reliance Infrastructure Ltd., Jindal Power Ltd. and various other agencies. For undertaking the said projects, the appellant used various goods manufactured as well as imported and locally procured. The appellants in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also submitted that the trading activity as exempted service would have effect only with effect from 1.4.2011 and not prior to the said date since during the period of dispute the provisions of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules are inapplicable to the appellant. He also submitted that the extended period cannot be invoked as the issue relates to interpretation of law and the appellant has given all the details of trading in their Balance Sheet during the relevant period on the basis of which the demand has been raised. He also submitted that the appellant has not suppressed any facts with intent to evade payment of duty. He further submitted that the demand of interest and penalty is not sustainable as the appellant reversed the credit pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onble High Court has categorically held that the Cenvat credit of service tax pertaining to common input services attributable to trading activity is not permissible. Earlier also the Tribunal in the case of M/s Orion Appliances Ltd. Vs. CST, Ahmedabad [2010-TIOL-752-CESTAT-AHM] has held that trading activity cannot be called a service and therefore, it cannot be considered as exempted service also. 6. After considering the submission of both the parties and perusal of record and the judgment of Hon ble High Court of Madras cited supra, I am of the considered view that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the Revenue by the judgment of the Hon ble Madras High Court. As far as the imposition of interest and penalty is concern ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
