M/S. H One India Pvt. Ltd vs C.C., C.C.E. & S.T. Noida

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 109-CE/APPL/Noida/2013 dated 16.05.2013 by the Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax (Appeals), Noida].

For approval and signature:

Honble Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)

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?

M/s. H One India Pvt. Ltd. .Appellants

Vs.

C.C., C.C.E. & S.T. Noida .Respondent

Appearance:

Shri H Bajaj, Advocate for the Appellants

Shri R.K. Mishra, DR for the Respondent

CORAM:

Hon'ble Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)

Date of Hearing: 13.02.2015

FINAL ORDER NO. 50374/2015 -EX(SM)

Per Ashok Jindal:

The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order denying excess Cenvat Credit on transportation charges paid by them.

2. The facts of the case are that appellant is manufacturer of excisable goods. They transported inputs and they paid service tax on transportation charged for the said goods. As per the notification no.13/2008-ST the appellant was required to pay service tax on the value of 25% of the transportation charges. Instead of paying 25% of the value of transportation charges appellant paid full amount in cash and took Cenvat Credit thereon. But revenue is of the view that as appellant is required to pay Service tax on 25% of the value of transportation charges and therefore they are entitled to take Cenvat Credit to the extent of 25% of the Service Tax on the value of 25% of transportation charges. In these set of facts proceedings were initiated against the appellant which were converted into denial of Cenvat Credit. Consequently demand on duty along with interest and penalty was also imposed.

3. Heard the parties.

4. Considering the facts that as per Rule 3 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 an assessee is entitled to take Cenvat Credit of the duty paid. Admittedly in this case there is no dispute regarding the payment of duty. Therefore, whatever duty is being paid appellant is entitled to take Cenvat Credit. In these circumstances, I hold that proceedings in this case were not required to be initiated.

5. Consequently impugned order is set aside. Appeal is allowed with consequential relief if any.

(Dictated and pronounced in the open court)

(Ashok Jindal) Member (Judicial)

Bhanu

2

E/59897/2013-EX(SM)