2009 (5) TMI 346

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....araj, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per: T. K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. - In terms of the impugned order, the appellants are required to pre-deposit the following sums: (1) Rs. 2,59,97,348/- duty. (2) Penalty of Rs. 100/- per day under Section 76 till 18-4-2006 and Rs. 200/- per day or 2% after 18-4-2006. (3) Interest under Section 75. The above amount represents the Cenvat credit ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Joint Venture Company MHB Ltd., (PMHB) was promoted by the appellants for the operation of Mangalore-Hasan-Bangalore pipeline with construction of oil terminal by the appellants at Hasan. PMHB is also registered assessee and are charging service tax for the transportation of the oil through pipelines. The appellants have reimbursed the service tax charged by PMHB and have taken Cenvat credit of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and not for the business of M/s. IOCL and M/s. BPCL. Therefore as per the definition of input service given in the Cenvat Credit Rules, he held that the transportation of petroleum products through pipelines on their own account does not constitute 'input service' relating to the output service of storage warehousing in respect of petroleum products received on behalf of M/s. IOCL and BPCL. In vie....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....agination be called as input service in respect of the output service provided to the other companies. 5. On a very careful consideration of the issue we observe the following: (1) The transportation of goods belonging to all the three oil companies is a technological necessity. It has been categorically stated that MRPL would not allow the transportation if any one of the oil companies does....