2015 (11) TMI 37

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iginal dated 10/2/14 passed by the Commissioner. The facts of the case in brief are that the appellants are having their captive power plant for generation of electricity. The dispute in present case relates to availment of Cenvat credit of service tax paid on various input services. The Department is of the view that since these services are commonly used in or in relation to the generation of electricity which in turn is used within the factory as well as wheeled outside the factory to the residential colony and to third parties accordingly the Department hold the view that they were required to pay 10% of the value of electricity sold outside the factory in terms of Rule 6 (3) (b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules. Three show cause notices were....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... TIOL 557 HC ALL CX. Without prejudice to the above submission, the appellant pleaded that the demand, if any, can only be to the extent of proportionate credit of service tax on various input services attributable to the generation of electricity wheeled outside the factory premises. The amendment made by the Finance Act, 2010 gives a manufacturer an option of reversing credit attributable to input services used in the manufacturer of exempted goods. Further it was contended that for the period 01/4/2008 to June 2009, the appellant have exercised the option under Rule 6 (3) (a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and, hence, demand of 10% value of electricity is not sustainable. The learned Counsel strongly contended that extended period of d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....credit and as such the demand made by the lower authority is sustainable. 2. Heard both the sides and examined appeal records. The point for decision is whether or not the appellant is liable to pay 10% of value of electricity wheeled out of their factory during the relevant period. Another important issue for decision is whether the show cause notice-cum-demand dated 12/11/2009 covering the period of April 2005 to June 2009 is hit by time bar. On perusal of the case details it is clear that the matter regarding the status of electricity whether the same is excisable, exempted is a matter of dispute and has been subject matter of various rulings by CESTAT, Hon'ble High Courts and Hon'ble Supreme Court. In the appellant's own case earlier p....