9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 519X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... workers viz. (i) Krebs Manufacturing and Service Ltd., (ii) M/s Texmaco Ltd. for necessary processing under cover of challans issued in terms of Rule 4 (5)(a) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and the job workers returned the goods after necessary processing. While raising bills for such processing, the job workers charged service tax on the value of the service under the 'Head Business Auxiliary Service'. In terms of the Notification No.8/2005-ST dated 01.03.2005, the taxable service of production or processing of goods for, or on behalf of the client as referred to in Sub-clause(v) of Clause (19) of Section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994, is fully exempted where such goods are produced using raw materials or semi-finished goods supplied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proof regarding the admissibility of CENVAT credit shall lie upon the provider of output service taking such credit. During the period from March, 2005 to February, 2008, M/s BOC India Ltd.had availed CENVAT credit on an exempted input service for an amount of Rs. 7,35,975/- on the bills of M/s Krebs Manufacturing and Service Ltd. and Rs. 5,99,964/- on the bills of M/s Texmaco Ltd, thus, amounting to a total of Rs. 13,35,939/-. Thus, CENVAT credit of service tax amounting to Rs. 13,35,939/- only, availed in an irregular manner by way of mis-statement and suppression of facts appeared to be recoverable from them under Rule 14 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and proviso to Section 73 (1) of the Finance Act, 1994 read with proviso to Section 11A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commr. of Central Excise, Thane II reported in 2007 (215) ELT 376 (Tri-Mum.). This view has also been affirmed by the Principal Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Commr. of Central Excise & S.Tax, Raipur Vs. SKS Ispat and Power Ltd. : 2017 (47) STR 79 (Tri.-Del.). In the case of Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs Vs. MDS Switchgear Ltd. : 2008 (229) ELT 0485 (SC), the Hon'ble Apex Court in Paras 7,8 & 9 has held as follows : "7. The Tribunal has come to the conclusion that in fact there was no loss of revenue. It accepted the appeal by recording the following reasons : "Reasons given by the appellants for the alleged inflation of the value of the intermediate goods are logical. What was required of the Commissioner was to exam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
