9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 1184X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Appellants Shri G R Singh, DR for the Respondent Per: Ashok K Arya: The appellant M/s. Hindustan Zinc is in appeal against the order in appeal No. 210/2016 dated 11.7.16 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Jaipur. The disputed issue is regarding the cenvat credit of Service Tax paid on technical inspection and certification services with respect of pipe lines for supply of water from dams to the Dariba Mines of the appellant. 2. Both sides represented by learned Counsels Shri Anurag Kapoor, for the appellant and Shri G R Singh, for the Revenue, have been heard. 3. Considering the facts and the submissions of both the sides, it appears that subject matter is covered by Tribunal s decision in the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facturer of the final product. The subordinate legislation in the present case makes a distinction between inputs or capital goods on the one hand and input services on the other. Clause (i) above provides that the Service Tax should be paid on any input or capital goods received in the factory of manufacture of the final product. Such a restriction, however, is not imposed in regard to input services since the only stipulation in clause (ii) is that the input services should be received by the manufacturer of the final product. Hence, even as a matter of first principle on a plain and literal construction of Rule 3(1) the Tribunal was not justified in holding that the appellant would not be entitled to avail of Cenvat credit in respect of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n specified categories of services. However, it would be farfetched to interpret Rule 2(l) to mean that only two categories of services in relation to inputs viz. for the procurement of inputs and for the inward transportation of inputs were intended to be brought within the purview of Rule 2(l). Rule 2(l) must be read in its entirety. The Tribunal has placed an interpretation which runs contrary to the plain and literal meaning of the words used in Rule 2(l). Moreover as we have noted earlier, whereas Rule 3(1) allows a manufacturer of final products to take credit of excise duty and Service Tax among others paid on any input or capital goods received in the factory of manufacturer of the final product, insofar as any input service is conc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
