TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (7) TMI 1317
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cts of the case are that during the period April, 2011-June 2014 the appellant have availed cenvat credit on the basis of the invoices issued by different Effluent Treatment Plant (ETP) located outside the factory premises of the appellant. The Show cause notice dated 10.07.2014 was issued proposing to disallow cenvat credit availed on the services in relation to treatment of effluent/ waste during April, 2011 to June, 2014 on the ground that the ETP service do not qualify as input service as the same were not used in or in relation of finished goods whether directly or indirectly and thereby do not fall under the definition of input services as defined under Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Adjudicating Authority has confirmed t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. CCE-2011 (24) STR 32 (Tri. Ahmd) • Monarch Catalyst P. Ltd. Vs. CCE-2014 (300) ELT 89 (Tri. Mum) • CCE vs. Q H Talbros Ltd-2014-TIOL-2610-CESTAT-DEL 2.1 He also submits that the major part of the demand was barred by limitation as there is no suppression of fact on the part of the Appellant. 3. Shri Vijay G Iyengar, Learned Assistant Commissioner (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the finding of the impugned order. 4. We have carefully considered the submission made by both sides and perused the records. We find that the activity of treatment of effluent/ waste arising during the course of manufacture of finished product of the appellant, the said effluent/ waste is required to be mandat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....credit under the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. It was observed by the audit that the appellants had wrongly availed and utilized Cenvat credit on the services provided by M/s. Pai & Pai Chemicals India (P) Ltd., Bangalore for the treatment and disposal of effluent water, generated during the course of manufacture in their plant. It appeared that the appellants have availed and utilized irregular Cenvat credit of Rs. 4,08,799/-for the period from July, 2011 to December, 2012, in contravention of the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Hence the appellants were issued a show cause notice on 18-1-2013 as to why (i) the input service tax credit of Rs. 4,08,799/-availed and utilised by them should not be recovered. Why interest s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rvice used in or in relation to the manufacture of final product. On the other hand learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record and the definition of input service as provided in Rule 2(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, I am of the view that the impugned order is not sustainable in law because the disposal of industrial effluents are vital in safeguarding the environment and the appellant had availed the services of an independent agency to dispose of the effluents which arise from the manufacturing process and therefore the same is integrally connected with the manufacturing process and therefore fall in the definition of input services. ....