9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 899X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tariff Act, 1985. They are availing CENVAT Credit of duty paid on inputs, capital goods and service tax paid on input services. 2.1 During the course of audit of accounts, it was noticed that they had declared receipt of amounts of Rs. 66,98,571/-, Rs. 6,56,793/- and Rs. 49,108/- under job work charges for the periods 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 respectively. On enquiry, it was informed that the appellants carried out job work for M/s. Valeo Lighting Systems India Pvt. Ltd., Vallam, Sriperumbudur. The job work carried out by the assessee was conversion of polypropylene material into 'Automobile Lighting Equipment Parts' by the process of injection moulding. The movement of materials for job work was carried out under job work challans. On ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant has to maintain separate accounts. If the appellant opts not to maintain separate accounts, they have to reverse the credit or pay 5%/10% of the value of the exempted goods or services. 2.4 That the appellant did not comply with the provisions contained in Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 for which, a Show Cause Notice was issued proposing to recover the irregularly availed credit along with interest and also for imposing penalties. After due process of law, the Original Authority confirmed the demand of Rs. 4,44,268/- along with interest and also imposed equal penalty under Rule 15(2) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. (iv) The Department does not have a case that the activity carried out by the appellant does not amount to manufacture. So also, the emergence of a new excisable product after the activity carried out by the appellant is not disputed. Therefore, the activity carried out by the appellant being a process of manufacture, the allegation of the Department that the appellant is providing an exempted service is an erroneous interpretation of law. The demand raised on this misconception of law cannot sustain. 4. Ld. AR Shri. L. Nandakumar appearing on behalf of the respondent supported the findings in the impugned order. He emphasized on Sl. No. 30(c) of Notification No. 25/2012. He submitted that any intermed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... regate value had not exceeded one hundred and fifty lakh rupees during the preceding financial year." 6.2 For better appreciation, the definition of 'Business Auxiliary Service' prior to 01.07.2012 is also reproduced as under : " 'business auxiliary service' means any service in relation to - . . . [(v) production or processing of goods for, or on behalf of, the client;] but does not include any activity that amounts to manufacture of excisable goods." (Emphasis added) 7.1 The said definition would show that any activity which amounts to manufacture of excisable goods is not subject to levy of service tax under the category of 'Business Auxiliary Service'. After 01.07.2012, the Negative List of services under Section 66D of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
