Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S.Maa Samleswari Sponge Iron Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 24 February, 2012
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA
EASTERN ZONAL BENCH: KOLKATA
Appeal No.Ex.Ap.663/2010
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.10/CE/B-II/2010 dated 10.06.2010 passed by the Commissioner(Appeals) of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Bhubaneswar.)
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE
HONBLE S.K. GAULE, MEMBER(TECHNICAL)
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
Authorative report or not?
3. Whether Their Lordship wishes to see the fair copy
of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental
Authorities?
M/s.Maa Samleswari Sponge Iron Ltd.
Applicant (s)/Appellant (s)
Vs.
Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, BBSR-II
Respondent (s)
Appearance:
NONE but Written Submission for the Appellant (s) Shri D.K.Nath, Dy.Commr.(A.R.) for the Revenue (s) CORAM:
Honble Shri S.K. Gaule, Member(Technical) Date of Hearing/Decision :- 24.02.2012 Date of Pronouncement :- 24.02.2012 ORDER NO.
1. Appellant filed this appeal against Order-in-Appeal No.10/CE/B-II/2010 dated 10.06.2010 whereby ld.Commissioner(Appeals) upheld the lower adjudicating authoritys order.
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants availed CENVAT Credit on Service Tax paid by the appellants in respect of GTA service for transporting the inputs to the appellants factory. The department demanded reversal of proportionate CENVAT Credit for transporting the iron ore fines which the appellants sale in the market.
3. The appellants submitted written submission and pleaded that the case may be decided on the basis of their written submissions. In their written submission the appellants have relied upon this Tribunals decision in the case of M/s.Shyam DRI Power Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, BBSR-II vide order No.A-157/KOL/2011 dated 18.05.2011 wherein on the similar facts appeal has been allowed in favour of the assessee.
4. Ld.A.R.(Dy.Commr.) appearing for the department reiterated the findings of the ld.Commissioner(Appeals).
5. I have perused the record and considered the submissions. This Tribunal on similar facts in the case of M/s.Shyam DRI Power Ltd. (supra) has held as under :-
5. After hearing both sides and perusal of the case records including the cited case law, I find that precedent decisions of the Tribunal as well as of Honble Punjab & Haryana High Court are against the Department. Moreover, in this case, the entire inputs have been taken into use and subjected to crushing. Only the resultant fines have been sold outside. It cannot be said that the inputs have been cleared as such. Therefore, this case is on a better footing than those decided by the Tribunal and the Honble High Court earlier. In any case, there is no provision for reversal of CENVAT Credit of Service Tax paid on transportation of inputs or capital goods. Hence, the impugned orders passed by the authorities below cannot be sustained and the same were set aside and Appeal is allowed.
6. Following the ratio of the above decision I find that the ld.Commissioners (Appeals) Order is not sustainable hence set aside. Appeal allowed.
(Pronounced and dictated in the open court.) Sd/ (S.K. GAULE) MEMBER(TECHNICAL) sm 3 Appeal No.Ex.Ap.663/2010