Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Commissioner Of Central Excise & ... vs Essel Propacks Limited on 25 April, 2008
IN THE CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI COURT No.I Appeal No.ST/0157/2007-Mum (Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.GOA/CEX/MP/67/ST/2007 dated 11.07.2007 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Goa) Honble Mr.A.K.Srivastava, Member (Technical) ====================================================
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see No 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 No CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy Seen of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental Yes authorities?
========================================== Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Goa Appellants Vs. Essel Propacks Limited Respondent Appearance:
Shri Ramesh Raman, Manager for the Appellants Shri P.K.Katiyar, SDR for the Respondents CORAM:
Honble Mr.A.K.Srivastava, Member (Technical) Date of hearing : 25.04.2008 Date of decision: 25.04.2008 O R D E R No:..
Per: Mr.A.K.Srivastava, Member(Technical Heard both sides and perused the records.
2. I find that the issue involved in the instant appeal filed by the Revenue already stands settled in favour of the Respondents in their own case for the earlier period vide the Tribunals decision reported in 2007 (83) RLT 480 (CESTAT-Mum) in which it has been held that the credit can be utilized for paying service tax on GTA service by its recipient since he is service provider, being liable to pay service tax.
3. Similar view has been taken by various benches of the Tribunal in the following cases:-
(i) Sundararaja Mills Ltd. vs. CCE(Service Tax), Madurai, 2007-TIOL-1989-CESTAT-MAD
(ii) CCE, Nagpur vs. Visaka Industries Ltd.,2007 (8) STR 231 (Tri.-Mum)
(iii) RRD Tex Pvt.Ltd. vs. CCE, Salem, 2007 (8) STR 186 (Tri.-Chennai)
(iv) Andhra Pradesh Paper Mills Ltd. vs. CCE, Vishakapatanam-II, 2007 (8) STR 166 (Tri.-Bang)
(v) India Cements Ltd. vs. CCE, Salem, 2007 (7) STR 569 (Tri.-Chennai)
(vi) CCE, Chandigarh vs. Nahar Industrial Enterprises Ltd.,2007-TIOL-555-CESTAT-DEL.
4. In the light of foregoing, I do not find any merit in the appeal filed by the Revenue and accordingly dismiss the same.
(pronounced in the court )
(A.K.Srivastava) Member (Technical)
mk
2