TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (11) TMI 745
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....flats etc. falling under chapter 72 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. It is his submission that the present confirmed demand comprises of two components. He has submitted that Rs. 95,57,573/- relates to denial of CENVAT Credit on the input service, namely, GTA service. The Ld. Advocate has submitted that the Department has denied the same on the ground that part of the inputs being cleared as such, hence, the proportionate Service Tax credit availed on the GTA Services attributable to the inputs cleared as such, since not used in the manufacture of finished goods, required to be reversed. The Ld. Advocate has further submitted that the issue is now no more res integra and covered by the judgement of this Tribunal and Punjab & Haryana High....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ithout reversal of SAD, is incorrect. The Ld. Advocate further submitted that Education Cess cannot be levied on the amount of SAD which the Department alleges to have been wrongly not reversed at the time of clearance of their imported inputs as such. However, the Ld. Advocate has fairly conceded that all the documents whereby it could be established that the inputs Manganese Ore cleared from the factory of the Applicant to their sister units had not been placed before the Ld. Commissioner for verification/scrutiny. The Ld. Advocate made a fair offer to deposit around Rs. 20.00 Lakhs. 3. The Ld. A.R. for the Revenue has submitted that the Applicant had failed to establish that the input Manganese Ore cleared from their factory to their un....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ned by them that during the relevant period they have only cleared Manganese Ore procured indigenously and not cleared the Manganese Ore imported by them on which SAD has been paid. We find that there is some force in the claim of the Appellant. The voluminous records produced by the Appellant before us to some extent show that the Appellant have cleared Manganese Ore from their indigenous stock only. When we examined the record we find that the quantity of 16952.665 M.T. though pertains to the period prior to import of the Manganese Ore, but wrongly included in the demand. The Ld. Advocate fairly conceded before us that the said plea was not taken before the Ld. adjudicating authority. We also after going through the observation of the Ld.....