9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 519X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... K. CHOUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Shri Nand Kishore Kothari, C.A. for the Appellant Shri S. Mukherjee, Supdt. (A.R.) for the Revenue ORDER Per: Shri P. K. Choudhary This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the Order-in-Original No.35/JC/ST/Kol/2008-09 dated 27.02.2009 passed by Commr. of S.Tax, Kolkata. 2.1 M/s BOC India Ltd., the appellant herein, is a provider of output services, namely, Erection, Commissioning and Installation Service etc., The appellant had sent raw materials as free issue to the job 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 w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... availed credit on the strength of such job bills. 2.2 Investigations revealed that although one of the job workers i.e. M/s Krebs Manufacturing Service Ltd.. have charged service tax in their job bills and collected service tax from M/s BOC India Ltd., they had not paid the amount so collected to the credit of the Central Government. Rule 9 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, stipulate that the provider of output service taking CENVAT credit on input service is required to take reasonable steps evidencing the payment of service tax and that the burden of 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 L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f ₹ 13,35,939/- is imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Rule 15 (4) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Hence the present appeal. 3. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 4. I find that the issue in the present case is as to whether the appellant is eligible to take CENVAT Credit on the impugned goods. As held by the Adjudicating Authority, the present issue is settled in favour of the appellant by various Forums. The ld.Counsel appearing for the appellant, relied upon the Tribunal's decision in the case of M/s Nikita Transphase Adducts Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Central Excise, Thane II reported in 2007 (215) ELT 376 (Tri-Mum.). This view has also been affirmed by the Principal Bench o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ested or challenged by the officers in charge of recipient unit [2000 (38) RLT 179]. 8. Counsel appearing for the Revenue could not assail any of the findings recorded by the Tribunal. 9. That being the position, we agree with the view taken by the Tribunal and find no merit in these appeals which are dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs. 5. In view of the above, the issue stands settled by various judgements that the credit cannot be denied at the receivers end. Therefore, when the supplier has paid duty and issued valid invoices, the appellant is eligible to take credit, moreover, the issue herein is a revenue neutral situation. Therefore, the argument vehemently put-forth by the respondent does not hold ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
