TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 1720
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and therefore, they are disposed of by a common order. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is a captive mine for M/s. Hindalco Industries Limited [hereinafter referred to as 'Hindalco'] and engaged in mining of Bauxite ore and also registered with the respondents as Input Service Distributor (ISD). The Bauxite so mined by the appellant is used by the manufacturing units of Hindalco in Renukoot and Muri for manufacturing of Aluminium and products of Aluminium. In order to undertake mining activities and provide raw materials (viz. Bauxite) to manufacturing units, the appellant avails various services at the mines like business auxiliary service, GTA Service, mining service, etc., within the mines. The service providers raised....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f Bauxite mines; since scheme of ISD envisages distribution of credit by an office of manufacturer / service provider, the appellant cannot be considered as an ISD and such distribution of credit by the appellant is incorrect. 5. Aggrieved from the said orders, the appellant is before us. 6. The Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the appellant-mines are captive mines to the manufacturing units of Hindalco, making both as one integrated unit. She argued that the issue is no longer res integra as decided in the case of Hindalco's manufacturing units and therefore, the parallel proceedings at the end of the mines for denial of CENVAT Credit, are not sustainable. 6.1. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nufacturing units. For this, she relied on the following decisions: • Jubilant Life Sciences Ltd. V. CCE, Noida, 2019 (29) G.S.T.L. 319 (Tri.-All), affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, 2019 (29) GSTL J74 (Supreme Court) • Aurobindo Pharma Limited vs. CCT, Hyderabad GST-2019-TIOL-3415-CESTAT-HYD • Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Ltd. v. CCE, Hyd, 2020-TIOL-1246-CESTAT-HYD 6.3. She also submitted that on parallel proceedings initiated against the manufacturing unit of Hindalco at Renukoot for denial of the very same CENVAT Credit distributed by the appellant-mines at Lohardaga, on identical grounds covering the part-period under dispute in the present case, reported as Hindalco Industries Ltd. V. Commissio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ved in the matter has been considered by this Tribunal in the case of Steel Authority of India Ltd.v. Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Bolpur vide Final Order No. 75468 of 2024 dated 07.03.2024 wherein the facts of the case were as under: - "2. The facts of the case are that the Appellant is a manufacturing unit of Steel Authority of India Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'SAIL') engaged in the manufacture of Iron and Steel products classifiable under Chapters 72 and 73 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The main raw materials viz. iron ore, manganese required for the manufacture of the final products are procured by the Appellant from Gua and Manoharpur mines, which are also part of the legal entity of SAIL. Th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t the mines are not eligible to distribute credit as ISDs in terms of Rule 2(m) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Accordingly, the Notice proposed to recover CENVAT Credit amounting to Rs. 17,76,34,847/- from the Appellant, along with interest and equivalent penalty. The said Show Cause Notice was adjudicated and the demands raised in the Notice were confirmed by the Ld. Commissioner of Central Excise, along with interest and penalty, vide the impugned order dated 18.09.2013 issued on 24.09.2013." and this Tribunal had held as under: - "5. We find that the issue is no longer res integra as this Tribunal has already decided the same issue in their own case for the period June 2016 to June 2017, reported as Steel Authority of Indi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of final products. Thus, we find that the Appellant is entitled to avail credit of service tax paid on input services received at the mines, which serves as an intermediate product for manufacture of final product i.e. steel items. 8. We observe that the Issue is no longer res integra as this Tribunal on identical facts and circumstances has decided the same issue in favour of the Appellant in the case of Usha Martin Ltd. v. CCE, Jamshedpur, 2023 (6) TMI 1153 - CESTAT Kolkata. The relevant paras of the said decision are reproduced below: ........... 9. By relying on the decision cited above we hold that the Appellant is eligible to avail CENVAT Credit of input services relating to captive mines, which is distrib....