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

2008 (9) TMI 54

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cturer of Steel billets/S.S. bars, Wire rods and registered accordingly with the Central Excise authorities. They are also registered with the Central Excise authorities as service tax assessee. They received required raw materials from different parties and for the said purposes they used the services of goods transport agency. In respect of such receipts, they paid the freight and accordingly paid the service tax. They have taken the credit of such service tax paid by them and utilized the same credit for payment of service tax payable by them on subsequently received consignments for which also they had to pay the service tax. In other words, they have paid the service tax payable on incoming consignments, using the credit of the service....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vice provided by the non-resident Commission Agents. (b) In terms of Rule 2(q) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 "Person liable for payment Service Tax" has the meaning as assigned to it in Rule 2(1)(d) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. Thus, for the purpose of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and the Service Tax Rules, 1994 the term 'Person liable for paying Service Tax" has the same meaning. (c) In terms of Rule 2(r) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 "Provider of Taxable Service" includes a person liable for paying Service Tax. Therefore, it is submitted that since the Appellant is a "Person liable for payment Service Tax", they are "Provider of Taxable Service". (4) As per Rule 3(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, a manufacturer can avai....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he learned SDR reiterates the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). He submits that in respect of the services of goods transport agency, the appellants cannot be considered as provider of any taxable service. He relies on Board's Circular No. 97/8/2007, dt. 23-8-07 issued from F. No. 137/85/2007-CX-IV. 5.2 He also relies on the following decisions. (a) 2007 (7) S.T.R. 26 (T)- CCE v. Nahar Industrial Enterprises Ltd. (b) 2005 (183) E.L.T. 351 (Bom) - Lloyds Steel Inds. Ltd. v. UOI (c) 2007 (207) E.L.T. 129 (T) - Nehru Steel v. CCE (d) 2008 (9) S.T.R. 53 (T) = 2007 (82) RLT 922 (CESTAT) - Ambattur Petrochem Ltd. v. CCE (e) 2007 (8) S.T.R. 23i (T) - CCE v. Visaka Ind. Ltd. (f) 2007 (8) S.T.R. 186 (T) - R.R.D. Tex. Pvt, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....onnection with receipt of inputs received in their factory as held by the Tribunal in the case of M/s. India Cements Ltd. cited supra. (f) notwithstanding taking of credit of service tax paid under goods transport operator/agency services in respect of incoming consignments, the respondents are eligible to avail the benefit of notification No. 32 /2004-S.T., dated 3-12-2004. (g) in the given facts and circumstances of the case, which involve interpretational difference, imposition of penalty is not justified." 7. In other words, when the manufacturer takes credit of service tax paid under GTA services on incoming consignments, such credit can be utilized for paying the duty on the excisable goods manufactured by them; they can util....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s an identical issue, which may have some bearing in the present case, was referred to Larger Bench in the case of M/s. India Cements Ltd. [2007 (8) S.T.R, 43 (Tri.-Bang.) = 2007 (216) E.L.T. 81 (Tri.-Bang.)] and the result was being awaited. As the decision in the above case has not become available till date, I proceed to record my separate order. 11. As the issue involved already stands detailed in the said order, the facts are not being repeated. However, I would like to make it clear that the decisions referred to in para 5.2 of the order proposed by ld. Member (Technical) were cited by the advocate appearing for the appellant and were not relied upon by the ld. SDR, as mentioned in the said paragraph. All the said decisions are to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bsp;                                                                                                                            &n....