9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (7) TMI 555X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ces are availed on payment of duty and as long as they are capable of being used in the provision of service Tax and manufacture of excisable goods credit cannot be denied; there is no requirement of one to one correlation. Time Limitation - HELD THAT:- Timely scrutiny of Returns by the Department would have shown that there is huge accumulated credit; Department was free to further investigate the matter and issue timely SCN. In view of the same, the appellants have a strong case on limitation too and the SCN is barred by limitation. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Central Excise Appeal No. 3177 of 2012 - Final Order No. 20393/2020 - Dated:- 14-7-2020 - SHRI S.S GARG ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the following cases it was held that credit cannot be denied or restricted on the basis of one to one co-relation: S.S. Engineers Vs CCE, 2015 (38) STR 614 (Tri. Mum.) affirmed by Bombay High Court in 2016 (42) STR 3 (Bom.) CCE Vs New Swadeshi Sugar Mills, 2015 (323) ELT 222 (SC) affirming the Tribunal s decision reported in 2005 (191) ELT 200 (Tri. Del.) CCE Vs GTL Infrastructure Ltd, 2019 (29) GSTL 650 (Bom.) CCE Vs National Engineering India Ltd, 2018 (16) GSTL 271 (Raj.) Entraco Power Systems Pvt. Ltd. Vs CCE, 2017 (3) GSTL 129 (Tri. Mum.) CCE Vs Graphite India Ltd, 2017 (3) GSTL 505 (Tri. Mum.) Secure Meters Ltd. Vs CCE, 2017 (3) GSTL 485 (Tri. Del ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rvice tax from 8 per cent to 10 per cent. 6. We find that in terms of Rule 3(1) a manufacturer or producer of final products or a provider of taxable service shall be allowed to take credit (hereinafter referred to as the CENVAT credit) of -------- -------- (ix) The Service Tax leviable under Section 66 of the Finance Act ------ -------- Paid on (i)-------- (ii) any input service received by the manufacture of final product or by the provider of output services on or after the 10th day of September 2004. From these provisions, we find that manufacturer of excisable goods can take credit of CENVAT paid on input services and there is no such requirement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... umulated credit under Rule 10(1) of CCR, 2004 and hence the ratio is not applicable. We also find that Apex Court in the case Ramesh Foods Ltd. 2004 (174) ELT 310 SC held that there is no requirement of one-to-one co-relation in availment of CENVAT. Therefore, we find that the impugned order is not maintainable. 8. The appellants have vehemently fought on the issue of limitation. They pleaded that SCN was issued on 05.09.2011 whereas the normal period expired on 10.09.2010; the SCN was issued on the basis of the Audit of records maintained by the appellants; therefore, extended period cannot be invoked by alleging suppression and that they were also submitting/filing the Returns regularly. He relies upon the decisions in CCE Vs ZYG ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
