M.V.RAVINDRAN
Mahindra Ugine Steel Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad – Respondent
1. This stay application is directed against the confirmation of demand of Rs. 4,67,139 and Education Cess Rs. 9,342 + interest at appropriate rate under section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994 and penalty of Rs. 14,36,383 under the provisions of section 76 read with section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.
2. After hearing both sides for some time on the stay application, I find that the issue involved in this case is squarely covered by the various decisions of the Tribunal, hence after granting waiver the pre-deposit of the amount involved, the appeal is taken up for disposal.
3. The issue involved in this case is regarding the confirmation of demand of service tax on the ground that the appellant has used the Cenvat credit for discharging the service tax liability on the services provided by Goods Transport Agency to the appellant. The Ld. Adjudicating authority held against the appellant and on an appeal the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has come to the following findings while upholding the order-in-original :-
"In terms of rule 3(4) of the Rules, Cenvat Credit can be utilized for the following payments :-
(a)any duty of excise payable on any final products;
| (b ) & (c)** | ** | |
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.