Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2017 (12) TMI 1210

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....8/13 have been filed by M/s Industrial Heat Treaters (IHT) against Order-in-Original dt. 31.01.2012 and 25.10.2012 for the period April, 2006 to September, 2010 and October, 2010 to September, 2011 respectively. The Appeal No.ST/87219/13 has been filed by M/s Induction Hardening Company (IHC) for the period April, 2006 to September, 2010 against Order-in- Appeal dt. 15.03.2013. Against the same Order-in-appeal dt. 15.03.2013 the Revenue has also filed Appeal No. ST/87440/2013 as the demands for extended period and penalties were set aside on M/s Induction Hardening Company. 3. The common issue involved in all appeals is that M/s IHT & IHC are rendering services of job-work and have taken registration under category of Business Auxiliary ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the proportional amount equivalent to cenvat credit availed on input and input services. Having not done so they are liable to reverse the amount @ 5% or 6% of value of exempted service in terms of Rule 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The demand was confirmed by the adjudicating authority alongwith penalty and interest. M/s IHT & IHC filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the adjudication orders. However in case of M/s IHC the Appellate Commissioner dropped the demand for the extended period and penalty. M/s IHT and IHC have filed the appeals against the confirmed demands. The Revenue also aggrieved to the extent of setting aside the demand of the extended period and penalty on M/s IHC has filed the appeal. 5. Heard th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....anation. - For the purposes of this notification, - (i) the expression production of goods means working upon raw materials or semi-finished goods so as to complete part or whole of production, subject to the condition that such production does not amount to "manufacture" within the meaning of clause (f) of section 2 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944); (ii) "appropriate duty of excise" shall not include 'Nil' rate of duty or duty of excise wholly exempt. Thus the exemption under Notification 8/2005-ST is available only where the activity of the job-worker is in respect of goods on which central excise duty is paid by the principal manufacturer. In such case the Rule 3 of the CCR, 2004 is also equa....