9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (2) TMI 330X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enge. 2. On a perusal of the records, I find that, during the material period, the appellant was engaged in the manufacture of electrical goods and that, for bringing raw materials into their factory and transportation of the finished goods from the factory, they used GTA service provided by various transporters. Various other input services were also used by the assessee in, or in relation to, the manufacture and clearance of final products during the said period. CENVAT credit of the service tax paid on these input services was taken by the assessee and utilised for payment of service tax on GTA service in the reverse charge mechanism. This was objected to by the department on the ground that the GTA service was not an output serv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in the manufacture of excisable products and not engaged in the business of providing any output service as defined under Rule 2(p) of the CCR 2004; (d) that the show-cause notice in question proposed to deny CENVAT credit on input services vis-`-vis GTA service solely on the ground that the latter was not an output service for the appellant; (e) that such denial of CENVAT credit on input services has resulted in the impugned demand of service tax (with education cesses) on the GTA service inasmuch as such CENVAT credit was found have been utilised towards payment of service tax on the GTA service; (f) that the show-cause notice was issued within the normal period of limitation prescribed under Section 73 of the F ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... k) that the respondent has also claimed support from Alstom Projects India Ltd. vs. Commissioner of C. Ex., Coimbatore [2008 (12) S.T.R. 23 (Tri.-Chennai)]; (l) that, apart from the submissions made with regard to the demand of service tax and the imposition of penalty, another grievance has also been raised by the appellant, which is to the effect that an amount of Rs. 41,772/- paid in cash towards service tax on GTA service was ignored by the lower authorities while quantifying the demand. 4. On a perusal of the Hon ble High Court s judgement, I have found that the period of dispute involved in that case was prior to April 2006. The Hon ble High Court, on a set of facts similar to the facts of the instant case, framed the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
