TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 392X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . for the appellant Sh. H.C Saini, DR for the respondent ORDER Per :Mr. Anil Choudhary 1. The appellant Hindalco Industries is in appeal against the order-in-original whereby the Cenvat credit taken by them in respect of the input services received in the course of acquisition of land (for industrial use),wherein the appellant had to pay appropriate compensation for acquisition of land and also had to resettle the persons who were living on the said land, by constructing residential accommodation under the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy for setting up its Mahan Aluminum Smelter Plant at village Bargawan, Distt. Singrauli, MP. 2. The appellant acquired a piece of land in a remote village after paying appropri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re credit as disputed in the present proceedings, despite having eligibility for such credit. Details of the same have been duly intimated to the Department vide letters dated 24.09.2012. 5. Thereafter Revenue vide its letter dated 10th April 2013, further demanded interest on the amounts already reversed by the appellant. In reply thereto the appellant by their letter dated 30th September 2013 took the stand that the input services under dispute have been received for construction of residential colony near the plant, the same are related to be the activity of manufacture of excisable goods and as such are covered under the exhaustive definition of the term directly or indirectly in or in relation to manufacture of final product. Ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 20,11,2012, 22,09,2012/24.09.2012 31.05. 2013 respectively but has not paid due interest as per provisions of the Act Credit Rules. 7.Thus as per the provisions of Rule 14 of the Credit Rules the Noticee is also liable to pay interest on said reversed of inadmissible Cenvat Credit for the period from availment/taking of wrong credit till payment/reversal of said credit. Therefore, it appears that the interest amounting to ₹ 96,39,452/- (calculation sheet enclose as Annexure-A) is recoverable from the Noticee under Rule 14 of the Credit Rules read with section 11A Section 11AA of the Act on wrongly availed Cenvat Credit on input services. 8.The notice has also contravened the provisions of Rule 2(1) 3 9(5) of the Credit R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ervice or an office relating to such factory or premises advertisement or sales promotion, market research, storage upto the place or removal, procurement of inputs, accounting, auditing, recruitment and quality control, coaching and training, computer networking, credit rating, share registry, security, business exhibition, legal services, inward transportation of inputs or capital. Goods and outward transportation up to the place of removal. The input services were for rehabilitation and resettlement and the same had no relation for the manufacture of final products and clearance. The Noticee too is not disputing the same and had made the reversal of wrongly taken input service as per the directives of the department. The availament of ce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aken or utilized wrongly or has been erroneously refunded and that in the case of the aforesaid nature the provision of Section 11AB would apply for effecting such recovery. Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 specifically provides that where Cenvat Credit has been taken or utilized wrongly or has been erroneously refunded, the same along with interest would be recovered from the manufacturer or the provider of the output service. If the aforesaid provision is read as a whole there appears no reason to read the word OR in between the expression taken or utilized wrongly or has been erroneously refunded as the work AND . On the happening of ay of the three aforesaid circumstances such credit becomes recoverable along with interest. On ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Madras High Court in Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai v. Strategic Engineering (P) Ltd. 2014 9310) ELT509(Mad) and held that the liability to interest would arise either on the taking or utilization of credit, irregularly. The same gets further supported in view of the Single Member decision of the Tribunal in Dr. Reddy s Laboratories Ltd. V. Commr. Of C. Ex. S.T. Hyderabad- 2013(293) ELT 81(Tri-Bang.) conclude that the Hon ble Karnatka High Court s Decision in Bill Forge Pvt. Ltd is per incuriam, inter alia of Rule 3 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and for the further reason that it does not correctly appreciate the ratio of the Apex Court s decision in Ind-swift Laboratories Ltd. A similar view, that the ruling in B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
