Foods, Fats And Fertilisers Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs, Central ...

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 58/2010 (G) CE dated 08/12/2010 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax (Appeals), Guntur.]

For approval and signature:

HON'BLE SHRI ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

1 Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

2 Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?

3 Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?

4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?

Foods, Fats And Fertilisers Ltd P.B.No.15, Tanuku Road, Tadepalligudem 534101 West Godavari Dist, Ap. Appellant(s)

Versus

Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax GUNTUR P.B.NO. 331, C.R.BUILDING, KANNAVARI THOTA, GUNTUR - 520004 ANDHRA PRADESH Respondent(s)

Appearance:

Mr. A.K.S. MOORTHY, Vice President of Co. 3F INDUSTRIES LTD NO.1604, APIIC-IALA, MUTHUKUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DIST - 524323 AP For the Appellant

Mr. S. Teli, Dy. Com. (AR) For the Respondent

Date of Hearing: 27/05/2015

Date of Decision: 27/05/2015

CORAM:

HON'BLE SHRI ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Final Order No. 21195 / 2015

Per : ARCHANA WADHWA

A very short issue is involved in the present appeal. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of edible oils, etc., which they are exporting without payment of duty as are also clearing in the domestic market on payment of duty. Revenue by entertaining a view that inasmuch as the export of the goods is not inviting any duty liability, the appellant is not entitled to the CENVAT credit of service tax paid on the various services utilised for export of the goods. Accordingly, proceedings were initiated against them which resulted in passing of the present impugned order confirming the demand along with interest and imposing penalties.

2. I find that the issue is no more res integra. The Honble Bombay High Court in the case of Repro India Ltd. vs. UOI: 2009 (235) E.L.T. 614 (Bom.) has dealt with an identical situation and has held that CENVAT credit is available in respect of inputs used in manufacture of final products being exported irrespective of the fact that the final products are otherwise exempt. It stands held that the bar provided under Rule 6(1) and the liability created under Rule 6(3)(b) are not attracted.

3. Inasmuch as the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Honble Bombay High Court, I set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief to the appellant. (Order pronounced in open court)

ARCHANA WADHWA JUDICIAL MEMBER rv 2