2015 (4) TMI 1143

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e for the Respondent JUDGEMENT Per Ashok Jindal : Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order. 2. The facts of the case are that the respondent is manufacturer of Auto parts, components and they also undertake the activity of job work on behalf of the principal manufacturer of auto parts. The respondent is availing Cenvat credit on the inputs received by them for their own purpose as well .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... was confirmed. Penalty was also imposed. On challenge of this order before Commissioner (Appeals), who set aside the adjudication order. Therefore, Revenue is before me. 3. The contention of the learned AR is that on job work goods, the principal manufacturer is entitled to take Cenvat credit under the category of job worker. Therefore, Cenvat credit is required to be denied. And to take Cenvat c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... anpower supply service. For security services, he submits that security services qualifies the definition of Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, therefore they are entitled to take Cenvat credit. 5. Heard the parties. Considered the submissions. 6. The issue has been settled by Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Sterlite Industries (supra) wherein it has been held that job worker is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X