2015 (7) TMI 1010

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sue involved in these proceedings is whether appellant is required to pay an amount equivalent to 8% or 6% with respect to exempted activities under taken by the job worker which are exempted under Notification No. 8/2005 dated 01.03.2005. Learned Advocate relied upon the following case laws in support of his argument that this issue is now settled:- (i) Commissioner of Central Excise, Vadodra- I vs. M/s Vidya Wires Pvt. Ltd. - [2014-TIOL-1800-CESTAT-AHM] (ii) JBF Industries vs. C.C.E, VAPI - [2014(34) S.T.R. 345 (Tri.- AHMD.)] 3. Shri J. Nagori (AR) appeared on behalf of the Revenue and strongly defended the order passed by the first appellate authority. 4. Heard both sides and perused the case records. The issue involved is wh....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....annot be denied where inputs were used in the manufacture of goods which were cleared without payment of duty under Notification No. 217/86-C.E. In this judgment the Larger Bench approved the law laid down by CESTAT in the case of Jindal Polymers [2001(43) RLT 680 (Tri.-Del) = 2001 (135) E.L.T. 657 (Tri.-Del)]. We find that in the mater of Jindal Polymers (supra), a division of Jindal Polyester Ltd., were engaged in the manufacture of polyester/polymer chips falling under Chapter 39 on job work basis or Jindal Polyester Ltd. They received main inputs viz. DMT and MEG from Jindal Polyester Ltd. for the purpose of processing/job work in terms of Notification 214/86-C.E., dated 25.03.1986, on which no credit was taken by them. They also procur....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....has held that Cenvat credit of input services was admissible to the job worker clearing goods to principal manufacturer under Notification Number 214/86-C.E. In view of the above, we hold that the provisions of Rule 6(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 cannot be invoked for denying Cenvat credit of input services used by the appellant factory for manufacture of job-worked goods under Notification No. 214/86-C.E. Though the Larger Bench judgment in the case of Sterlite Industries (I) Ltd. was delivered with respect to Rule 57C of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, but the ratio of the same has been held to be applicable to the Service Tax credit availed by the job worker under Notification No. 214/86-C.E. as per the decisions of this Bench in ....