TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 552X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... where the cost of the food is borne by the worker (see last para). That part of the observation made by the Larger Bench cannot be upheld, because, once the service tax is borne by the ultimate consumer of the service, namely the worker, the manufacturer cannot take credit of that part of the service tax which is borne by the consumer. Shri Shridharan, learned Counsel for the assessee fairly conc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Appeals), Pune I, upholding the order-in-original dated 29.9.2010. 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of wire cables and OFC falling under Chapter Heading No. 85.44 and 90.01 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 respectively, and they are availilng the benefit of cenvat credit of excise duty paid on input and capital goods as well as of s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n merits. 4. The learned AR for the respondent submitted that the issue involved in this case is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CCE, Nagpur vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd. reported in 2010 (260) ELT 369 (Bom.). He further submitted that in the said judgment in para 39, the Hon'ble High Court has observed as under:- 39. The Larger Bench of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en reversed. The learned AR further submitted that the appellant is not entitled to take credit of the service tax paid by the company which relates to the recovery made from the employees for those services. 5. Since the issue is squarely covered by the judgment cited by the learned AR, I do not find any infirmity in the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) denying the benefit of cenvat c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
