M/S.Jai Jagannath Steel & Power Ltd vs Commr. Of Central Excise, Customs & ...
- CitationAppeal No.ST-20/11
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a Revenue demand for CENVAT credit on GTA services rests on the ground that the credit is inadmissible because the output (iron ore fines) was exempt from duty, and that same issue is squarely covered by a binding earlier decision of the Tribunal, the demand and the consequential penalty cannot be sustained; the impugned order is set aside following that earlier decision, without independent re-examination of the issue.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.43/ST/B-II/2010 dated 13.10.2010 passed by the Commissioner(Appeals) of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Bhubaneswar.)
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE
HONBLE DR. D.M. MISRA, 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 Authorative report or not?
3. Whether Their Lordship wishes to see the fair copy of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental Authorities?
M/s.Jai Jagannath Steel & Power Ltd. Applicant (s)/Appellant (s) Vs.
Commr. of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, BBSR-II
Respondent (s)
Appearance:
(Adj. Request) for the Appellant (s) Shri A.Roy, Supdt.(AR) for the Revenue (s)
CORAM:
Honble Dr. D.M. Misra, Member(Judicial)
Date of Hearing/Decision :- 24.8.2015 Date of Pronouncement :- 24.8.2015
ORDER NO.FO/A/75448/2015
Per Dr. D.M. Misra.
1. None present for the applicant. Heard the ld.AR for the Revenue.
2. This is an appeal filed against Order-in-Appeal No.43/ST/B-II/2010 dated 13.10.2010 passed by the Commissioner(Appeals) Central Excise & Service Tax., Bhubneswar. Demand of CENVAT Credit of Rs.5,55,606/- has been confirmed & penalty imposed on the Appellant on the ground that they have wrongly credit to the extent on the GTA Services involved in transferring sponge iron from mines to their factory, which on processing resulted into iron ore fines, an out put exempt from payment of duty; later cleared/sold as such by the appellant. Thus, the proportionate credit on GTA Service, involved on the iron ore fines, considered to be not admissible.
3. The ld.AR for the Revenue fairly accepts that the issue is covered by the judgement of this Tribunal in the case of Seven Star Steels Ltd. v. CCE, C & ST, BBSR-II 2013 (30) STR 532(Tri.-Kolkata).
4. I find that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of this Tribunal in Seven Star Steels Ltd.s case(supra). Following the said judgement, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed, with consequential relief, if any, as per law. Appeal allowed.
(Pronounced and dictated in the open court.)
SD/
(D.M.MISRA) MEMBER(JUDICIAL) sm
2 Appeal No.ST-20/11
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free