Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

Cce, Trichy vs M/S. Godrej Sara Lee Ltd on 14 December, 2010

        

 
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH AT CHENNAI

Appeal No. E/436/2010

(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 53/2010 dated 7.4.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Trichy)

CCE, Trichy							Appellant


     Vs.


M/s.  Godrej Sara Lee Ltd.					Respondents 

Appearance Shri T.H. Rao, SDR for the Appellant None for the Respondents CORAM Honble Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy, Technical Member Date of Hearing: 14.12.2010 Date of Decision: 14.12.2010 Final Order No. ____________ The respondents are not present. There is also no adjournment request. Heard the learned SDR Shri T.H. Rao appearing for the Department. In this case the respondent-manufacturer has claimed credit of service tax paid on security services for the job workers premises. As per Rule 3(1) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 credit of service tax paid on any input service received by the manufacturer of final product can be taken. In the present case, the input service has been received by the job worker and not by the manufacturer of the final product. As such, a plain reading of the provisions of the rules does not allow credit of service tax paid on security services received by the job worker to be taken by the respondent-manufacturer. Hence, the impugned order passed by the lower appellate authority cannot be sustained. I also find that even though the Department had gone in appeal to the lower appellate authority against non-imposition of penalty and there was no appeal by the respondent-assessee before the lower appellate authority, he has wrongly set aside the demand and interest in this case. On that ground also the impugned order-in-appeal cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the impugned order-in-appeal is set aside and the matter is remanded the lower appellate authority to consider the departments appeal afresh in regard to imposition of penalty after giving an adequate opportunity of hearing to both sides. The Departments appeal is thus allowed by way of remand. (Dictated and pronounced in open court) (Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy) Technical Member Rex ??

??

??

??

2