9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 885X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al. As such, in view of Rule 3 of CCR the appellant has rightly availed Cenvat credit - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rvices as defined under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The adjudicating authority after giving due hearing to the appellant confirmed the demand of ₹ 83,830/- with appropriate interest and also imposed penalty of equal amount. The appellant preferred an appeal against the order of adjudicating authority and the Appellate Authority vide impugned order confirmed the order-in-original and dismissed the appeal. 6. Ld. Sh. Jatin Mahajan, Advocate, for the appellant while assailing the impugned order submitted that the appellant is a job worker engaged in manufacture of biscuit on behalf of principal manufacturer PBPL. He has drawn our attention to the copy of the letter dated 15-3-2005 addressed to the Assistant Commissioner/Dy. Commissioner, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant and principal manufacturer PBPL and also the form TR-6 for payment of Service tax in respect of outward transportation submitted by the appellant in respect of the period in dispute. Thus, it is argued that the order-in-original as well as the order-in-appeal are liable to be set aside. In support of his contention, Id. Counsel for the appellant has relied upon the judgment of Karnataka High Court in the matter of CCE & ST, LTU Bangalore v. ABB Limited reported in 2011 (23) S.T.R. 97 (Kar.) as also the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Parsons Nutritionals Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Ghaziabad. 7. Refuting the argument ld. AR for the revenue submitted that in the instant case the place of removal of manufactured biscuits is the factor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eed upon between PBPL and the appellant would show that as per the job work contract the appellant were required to process and manufacture biscuit, carry out inspection, packing and delivery to various depots of PBPL located all over the country as directed by PBPL. From the above stipulation in the contract, appellants were under obligation to transport biscuits to various depots of PBPL as such obviously the place of removal was/were depots where the appellant was required to supply manufactured biscuit as per direction of the appellant. Admittedly, the appellants have transported the goods to the depots/premises of the principal manufacturer and paid transportation charges including the Service tax. In this regard, the appellant have pl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
