9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 1175X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his Court notices that there were two components. One, job work itself i.e. manufacture of confectionery and biscuits, which was the provision of service, i.e. the main service to M/s. Parle Products Pvt. Ltd. and secondly, the transportation services. It is the second component which is in issue in the present case. There is nothing either on record or in the show cause notice or even in the Order in Original which suggests that the agreement, which parties entered into whereby service tax was to be borne by the assessee and input credit was to be claimed by it, was prohibited in law - Furthermore, it is not revenue s case that M/s. Parle Products Pvt. Ltd. availed of, such Cenvat credit as a matter of fact. This Court is of the opinion ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aw and packing materials, capital goods. Mound Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. would make Excise Invoice/Stock Transfer Notes (STN s) to Depots/or Wholesalers of Parle Products Pvt Ltd. and would pay Excise duty on assessable value as shown in the Invoice of M/s Parle Products Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai. 3. Alleging unauthorized availment of Cenvat credit, show cause notice was issued to the respondent/assessee contending that it could not claim the credit (which it had done) since it provided input services to M/s Parle Products Ltd. and that the latter entity alone could claim credit. This show cause notice was confirmed by the Order in Original. Upon appeal, the CESTAT by impugned order set aside the Order in Original. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rd to Modvat scheme or any other credit scheme, should not be sufficient. 8. From the factual narrative and the record, it is apparent that according to the agreement of the parties, the assessee manufactured articles which were ultimately cleared by its principal i.e. M/s. Parle Products Pvt. Ltd. There is no dispute that Central Excise levy was borne by Parle. The assessee was merely authorized to manufacture the goods. 9. So far as provisions of Service tax is concerned, this Court notices that there were two components. One, job work itself i.e. manufacture of confectionery and biscuits, which was the provision of service, i.e. the main service to M/s. Parle Products Pvt. Ltd. and secondly, the transpor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
