9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 1153X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned Commissioner. It is not in dispute that coal and iron ore were essential raw materials for the Appellant and it is also not the case of the revenue that the Appellant had more than one factory or that the credit availed at the factory was in excess of the tax paid in respect of the services availed at the mines during the relevant period. A similar issue in the context of availment of cenvat credit of service tax in the hands of the factory in respect of input services received at the Captive Mines had fallen for consideration of the Tribunal in the case of Hindalco Industries case [ 2012 (10) TMI 922 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI] . The period involved therein was March 2005 to October 2010 and the credit was availed by the assessee s factory therein, directly as also on the strength of ISD invoices issued by the mines. The Tribunal allowed the credit of service tax to the assessee s factory by treating the Captive Mines and the factory as one integrated unit - the ratio of the said decision is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case as well. It is also found that the statutory ER-I returns were being filed along with a statement containing invoice-wise details ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cal Show-cause Notices were issued covering the period 2005-06 to 2010-11 to the manufacturing facility of the Appellant proposing denial of Cenvat credit of service tax in respect of services provided at the coal/iron ore mines to the manufacturing facility. Further, Bokna Iron Ore Mines of the Appellant, which had obtained registration as an ISD, was also made a Co-Noticee for imposition of penalty in four out of five Notices for the alleged violation of Rule 7(b) read with Rule 15 of the Cenvat Credit Rules (CCR).All the five Show-cause Notices were issued invoking the extended period of limitation and have culminated into the following proceedings: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Excise Appeal No. O-I-O No. Date SCN Dat Period Cenvat Credit involved Penalty involved Kathautia Mines Bokna Mines Total Appellant Bokna Mines ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applicable. The factory and the mines do not constitute one integrated unit but are separate units. Condition attached in the mining lease does not alter that fact and that in any event entire iron ore mined has not been used by the Appellant. (c) Inclusion of the cost of Iron Ore in valuing the Iron Steel products does not entitle the factory to avail credit in view of Sundaram Brake Lines Case relying upon the SC decision in Maruti Suzuki 2009 (240) ELT 641. (d) GTA services from Bokna Mines to Rail head not covered by Board Circular No. 97 dt. 23.08.07 as the service not in the nature of input service for the manufacturer and payment for the said service made by the mine. [These observations pertain only to OIO No. 32 (EA 717/2010)]. (e) Bokna Mines is engaged in the raising and transportation of non-excisable goods and therefore cannot be said to be an office of the manufacturer. ISD registration obtained by suppression/mis-representing the fact that mines and factory have different entities and are different profit centres of the Appellant. (f) Suppressed facts from the department that these are different entities and while taking ISD registration, therefor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ric Co. of India Limited Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes [1976 4 SCC 460] (ii) Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. Vs. CTO, [1985 4 SCC 173] (c) The definition of input service in Rule 2(l) of the CCR is wide enough to include services used by a manufacturer directly or indirectly in relation to manufacture of final products without any restriction as regards the usage of such services within the factory premises and also includes services received outside the factory and also specifically covers services in relation to procurement of inputs. Reference in this regard is invited to the following decisions: (i) Coca Cola Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-III [2009 (242) ELT 168 (Bom)] (ii) Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur Vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd. [2012 (278) ELT 523] (d) Cenvat credit could not have been denied on the ground that iron ore and coal were exempted goods as these were only intermediates required in the manufacture of the final product. The CBEC vide Circular dated 3 April 2000 has categorically clarified that Cenvat should not be denied if the inputs are used in any intermediate of the final produc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SD is concerned. (i) The decision of the Hon ble Tribunal in Sundaram Brake Linings case reported in 2010 (19) STR 172 on which reliance has been placed by the revenue is no more a good law as the same stands reversed by the Hon ble Madras High Court as reported in 2015 (39) STR 982. In any event, the final product cannot be manufactured without Iron Ore and Coal and therefore the services are integral to the business of manufacturing the final product. 8. The Ld. Authorized Representative for the revenue on the other hand, supports the impugned Orders and reiterates the findings of the Commissioner. 9. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 10. The crux of the issue before us in all these appeals is whether cenvat credit of service tax could be availed by the factory in respect of input services received at the captive coal iron ore mines, either directly or on the strength of the ISD invoices issued by the Bokna Mines Office. Ld. Commissioner entertained a view that coal and iron ore mines situated away from the factory were separate entities having their own financial transactions engaged in the manufacture of exempted goods and consequently the se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tive mines then the Cenvat credit on capital goods used in such mines will be available to the appellant. We find from the records submitted before us that the above stated mines were captive mines for the appellants also due to reason that revenue has stated on record that the records being maintained at various mines were having the same PAN Number. Therefore, the Cenvat credit of service tax on services availed at mines was admissible to the appellant. Further, we note that the appellant were availing Cenvat credit received through invoices issued by Lohardaga mines which has registration as Input Service Distributor and therefore, we find that said Cenvat credit was admissible to them. We further note that as held by Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs Dashion Ltd. (supra) even for the period when Lohardaga unit was yet to register as input service distributor the Cenvat credit distributed by said Lohardaga mine was admissible to the appellant, since Lohardaga mine was part and parcel of the establishment of the appellant . We find that the ratio of the said decision is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case as we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
