TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (11) TMI 1391
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....are that the respondent-assessee is engaged in the activity of manufacture of compressed natural gas (CNG) falling under Tariff Item 2711 21 00 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and clears the same on payment of duty. Respondent also purchases Piped Natural Gas (PNG) from various manufacturers like Gas Authority of India Ltd. (GAIL) and sells the same as it is. Thus, the respondent is engaged in the manufacture of dutiable goods (CNG) as well as in trading activity of the dutiable goods (PNG). During the period under consideration, the credit was availed by the respondent on various input services exclusively used for manufacturing activity and common input services used for manufacturing as well as trading activi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of an amount for Rs. 11,44,422/- for financial year 2014-15. Lastly, he made a request to dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue. 5. After hearing both the parties and on perusal of record, it appears that the identical issue has come up before the Tribunal in the case of CST vs. Machine Tools (I) Pvt. Ltd. - 2017 (8) TMI 833-CESTAT New Delhi where it was observed that- "6. We find that the Cenvat Credit Scheme is available only in respect of an assessee, who is either manufacturing dutiable final products or providing taxable output service. Admittedly, during the relevant time, trading is not categorised as service at all. It is only in 2011, the explanation was inserted under Rule 2(e) of CCR, 2004 to the effect that "exempted servi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ties. We find that the legal position has been examined and decided by the Tribunal in Mercedes Benz India Pvt. Ltd. - 2014 (36) STR 704 (Tri. Mum.). The said decision was affirmed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court reported in 2016 (41) STR 577 (Bom.) and SKF India Ltd. (ISD) -2016 (44) STR 61 (Bom.)". 6. Similarly, the issue was dealt with by the Tribunal in the case of Dalmia Bharat Sugar & Industries Ltd., vs. CCE -2017-TIOL-113-CESTAT-DEL where it was observed that- "8. We find that the coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Mercedes Benz India Pvt. Ltd. v. C.C.E., Pune I 2015 (40) STR 381 (Tri-Mum.) has held that the condition given in Rule 6(3A) to intimate the Department is only procedural matter and the delay of such pro....