TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (9) TMI 1240
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 at their factory located at Jamshedpur. The appellants are availing cenvat credit of the duty paid on the inputs as well as input services received and used by them in the manufacture of final products. Appellants do not have the facility to manufacture axles and gear boxes in their factory and accordingly they have supplied the raw materials to M/s. H.V.Axles Limited and M/s. H.V.Transmission Limited (hereinafter referred to as HVAL and HVTL) who manufacture the axles, gear boxes and components thereof. The inputs procured/purchased by the appellants are supplied directly to HVAL and HVTL and always belonged to the appellants. Copy of the job order placed by the appellants on HVAL and HVTL are available as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he manufacture of final products manufactured by the appellants. Show cause notices were issued and after due process of law, a demand of Rs. 1,21,64,153/- was confirmed under Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944 and a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- was imposed under Rule 15(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 vide the impugned order. Hence, the present appeal before this tribunal. 4. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant company reiterated the grounds of appeal and submitted that the appellants are receivers of the services rendered by the job worker and the said services have been used directly or indirectly, in or in relation to the manufacture of final products i.e. motor vehicles and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by the definition of input services with reference to the final product namely motor vehicle chassis. The impugned order holding that the services of the 3rd party processors are used only in the manufacture of axles and gear boxes and not in the manufacture of motor vehicle chassis is wholly incorrect and unsustainable in law. 6. Shri K.Choudhuri, Suptd.(AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterated the discussions and findings of the impugned order. 7. Heard both sides and after perusal of the case records we find that vide Notification No.8/2005-S.T. dated 01.03.2005 exemption has been extended to taxable service of production of goods on behalf of the client referred in sub-clause(b) of Clause (19) of Section 65 of the Finan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ure of such final product by the job worker. Rule 4(7). The CENVAT credit in respect of input service shall be allowed, on or after the day which payment is made of the value of input service and the service tax paid or payable as is indicated in invoice, bill or, as the case may be, challan referred to in Rule 9." 7.3 The Tribunal in the case of Indian Rayon & Ind. Ltd. (supra) has held that no such stipulation regarding receipt of input service, which is separately defined under the Rules, is provided. The Hon'ble High Court in the case of Ultratech Cement Ltd. (supra) has held that the definition of input service read as a whole makes it clear that the said definition not only covers services, which are used directly or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... It was pointed out at the time of hearing that the definition of input service credit was subsequently amended in 2011. We find that the present appeals are involving for the period 2006-2007. In any event, this issue is not before the Larger Bench. Hence, the view taken by the Tribunal in the case of Endurance Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (supra) is correct." 7.2. Respectfully following the above decisions of the Hon'ble High Court and the coordinate bench of the tribunal, we hold that the appellants are the receiver of the services rendered by the 3rd party job worker and the said services have been used directly or in directly in or in relation to the manufacture of motor vehicles chassis. Hence, the appellants are entitled to credit of s....