2015 (12) TMI 1491

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing the period from 2008-09 to 2012-13 (upto January, 2013), the appellants had availed input credit of service tax paid on the crushing charges of 20978.92 MT of iron ore. After crushing the appellant had received back only 14915.69 MT of iron ore for use in the manufacturing of their finished goods as some quantity after crushing results in waste which is not usable in the manufacture. The department observed that there is shortage of 6063.23 MT of iron ore from the job worker and this quantity has not been used in the factory of the appellants for manufacture of final products. Therefore that the service tax credit with regard to the quantity on short receipt of iron ore is not admissible. A show cause notice raising the above allegation....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e entire quantity of raw materials sent for job work is not received back in the factory of the appellant for manufacture of final products. Therefore, the input service tax credit which pertained to short receipt of quantity of 6063.23 MT of iron ore is not admissible to the appellants in terms of Rule 3(5) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. He relied upon the decision in Mukund Limited vs. CCE, Mumbai-III-202 (150) ELT 168 (Tri.Mum.). 4. Heard both sides and perused the records. 5. The appellant has availed input service tax credit in respect of crushing of raw materials/iron ore which was supplied to the service provider/job worker for the process of crushing. After crushing some portion becomes waste/unfit for use in manufacture of fin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Casting (P) Ltd. (Supra), the Tribunal has observed that as under:- "From the plain reading of this sub-rule, it is clear that what is required at the time of removal of any inputs, as such, in respect of which Cenvat credit has been taken, is that an amount equal to the credit availed in respect of such inputs is to be paid. The credit availed in respect of inputs would be only the credit of duties of excise, as there is no mention in this rule that in addition to the credit of the duty of excise, the credit of service tax in respect of services availed in bringing those goods to the factory is also required to be paid. The word 'inputs' covers only the input goods, not the input services. I find that same view has been taken by t....