9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 1054X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g to the present dispute, inter alia, are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Sugar, Molasses and Denatured Ethyl Alcohol under Chapter Sub-Heading No. 1701 11 90, 1703 10 00 and 2207 20 00 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and clear the same on payment of Central Excise duty; that the appellant avails CENVAT Credit of duty paid on inputs, capital goods and Service Tax paid on input services in terms of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004; that on verification of the CENVAT documents of the appellant for the period from April 2010 to March 2011, it was noticed by the Revenue that the appellant had availed CENVAT Credit of Service Tax paid based on invoices issued by their Head Office at Chennai, in their ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Adjudicating Authority vide Order-in-Original No. 06/2020-CE dated 21.09.2020, while allowing credit to the tune of Rs.62,872/-, disallowed an amount of Rs.10,99,320/-, on the ground that the same was ineligible, ordered recovery of the same under Rule 14 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, with appropriate interest, and imposed penalty of Rs.1,09,932/- on the appellant under Rule 15(3) ibid. Thereafter, the appellant preferred appeal before the First Appellate Authority, who passed the order impugned herein, confirming the denial of CENVAT Credit by the Adjudicating Authority and thereby rejecting the appeal filed by the assessee. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal has been f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aw in support of his contentions, which are as under:- (i) M/s. PTC Software (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-III [2014 (35) S.T.R. 632 (Tri. - Mum.)]; (ii) M/s. Faurecia Interior Systems (I) P. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-III [2015 (4) TMI 1063 - CESTAT, Mumbai]; (iii) M/s. BNY Mellon International Operations (I) Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-III [2016 (45) S.T.R. 116 (Tri. - Mum.)]; (iv) M/s. EXL Service.com (I) Pvt. Ltd. v. Commr. of Central Excise & Service Tax, LTU [2017 (5) TMI 1461 - CESTAT, New Delhi]' (v) M/s. Prism Cement Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhopal [2019 (369) E.L.T. 1205 (Tri. - Del.)]. 6. Per contra, the Learned Departmental Representati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... prior to 01.04.2011 is no more res integra, since the same has been laid to rest by the orders of various judicial fora. It is seen that on an identical set of facts, the Mumbai Bench of the CESTAT in its order in the case of M/s. PTC Software (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Commr. of Central Excise, Pune-III [2014 (35) S.T.R. 632 (Tri. - Mum.)], relied upon by the Learned Advocate for the appellant, has followed the judgements of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the cases of Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax. v. M/s. Micro Labs Ltd. [2012 (26) S.T.R. 383 (Kar.)] and Commr. of C.Ex., Bangalore-III v. M/s. Stanzen Toyotetsu India (P) Ltd. [2011 (23) S.T.R. 444 (Kar.)] to hold that credit of Service Tax paid on insurance premium on group i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
