Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Orient Cement vs Cce, C & St, Hyderabad-I on 26 October, 2016
CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
REGIONAL BENCH AT HYDERABAD
Bench SMB
Court I
Appeal No. E/3326/2012
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 107/2012 (H-I) CE dt. 27.08.2012 passed by CCE, C & ST (Appeals-I&III), Hyderabad)
For approval and signature:
Honble Ms. Sulekha Beevi, C.S., Member(Judicial)
1.
Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2.
Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
3.
Whether their Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the Order?
4.
Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?
M/s. Orient Cement
..Appellant(s)
Vs.
CCE, C & ST, Hyderabad-I
..Respondent(s)
Appearance Shri. B.V. Kumar, Advocate for the Appellant. Shri. Guna Ranjan, Superintendent (AR) for the Respondent.
Coram:
Honble Ms. Sulekha Beevi, C.S., Member (Judicial) Date of hearing: 26/10/2016 Date of decision: 26/10/2016 FINAL ORDER No._______________________ [Order per: Sulekha Beevi, C.S.] The issue involved in this appeal is whether the appellants are eligible for credit on Welding Electrodes and Gases used for the repair and maintenance of plant/machinery during the period November, 2011 to June, 2012. The issue is covered by the judgment laid by Tribunal in the appellants own case of M/s. Madras Cements Ltd., vide order. Further in the case of Ramala Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd., [2016-TIOL-20-CE-CX-LB], the Honorable Larger Bench of the Apex Court held that the word includes in the definition of inputs during the relevant period cannot be considered to have a restrictive meaning. Following the above, I hold that the demand is unsustainable. The impugned order is set aside. The appeal is allowed with consequential reliefs if, any.
(Dictated & pronounced in open court) SULEKHA BEEVI C.S. MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Lakshmi.2