9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1391X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are that the respondent-assessee is engaged in the activity of manufacture of compressed natural gas (CNG) falling under Tariff Item 2711 21 00 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and clears the same on payment of duty. Respondent also purchases Piped Natural Gas (PNG) from various manufacturers like Gas Authority of India Ltd. (GAIL) and sells the same as it is. Thus, the respondent is engaged in the manufacture of dutiable goods (CNG) as well as in trading activity of the dutiable goods (PNG). During the period under consideration, the credit was availed by the respondent on various input services exclusively used for manufacturing activity and common input services used for manufacturing as well as trading activ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l of an amount for Rs. 11,44,422/- for financial year 2014-15. Lastly, he made a request to dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue. 5. After hearing both the parties and on perusal of record, it appears that the identical issue has come up before the Tribunal in the case of CST vs. Machine Tools (I) Pvt. Ltd. - 2017 (8) TMI 833-CESTAT New Delhi where it was observed that- "6. We find that the Cenvat Credit Scheme is available only in respect of an assessee, who is either manufacturing dutiable final products or providing taxable output service. Admittedly, during the relevant time, trading is not categorised as service at all. It is only in 2011, the explanation was inserted under Rule 2(e) of CCR, 2004 to the effect that "exempted serv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ities. We find that the legal position has been examined and decided by the Tribunal in Mercedes Benz India Pvt. Ltd. - 2014 (36) STR 704 (Tri. Mum.). The said decision was affirmed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court reported in 2016 (41) STR 577 (Bom.) and SKF India Ltd. (ISD) -2016 (44) STR 61 (Bom.)". 6. Similarly, the issue was dealt with by the Tribunal in the case of Dalmia Bharat Sugar & Industries Ltd., vs. CCE -2017-TIOL-113-CESTAT-DEL where it was observed that- "8. We find that the coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Mercedes Benz India Pvt. Ltd. v. C.C.E., Pune I 2015 (40) STR 381 (Tri-Mum.) has held that the condition given in Rule 6(3A) to intimate the Department is only procedural matter and the delay of such pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion, it is clear that it is the appellant who have liberty to decide which option to be exercised and not the Revenue to decide the same. 9. In the light of the above decision of the coordinate Bench we find that the Commissioner is not justified in insisting that appellant reverse cenvat credit in terms of Rule 6(3)(i) of Cenvat Credit Rules. The claim of the appellant is that they have already reversed on proportionate basis, the cenvat credit along with interest amount payable in terms of Rule 6(3A). However, the Department is entitled to verify whether reversal of the amount already made by the appellant satisfies the requirement of Rule 6(3)(ii) notwithstanding the fact that the procedural formalities have not been satisfied. For th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
