BAJAJ HINDUSTHAN LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.)

(2.) AFTER hearing both sides, I find that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of sugar and molasses as also in the manufacture of special denatured spirit and ethyl alcohol denatured. The dispute in the present appeal relates to the Cenvat credit of service tax availed by the appellant in respect of various services received by them, in relation to civil construction work in the factory. It is seen that originally show -cause notice was issued denying the benefit of credit in respect of various services. However, Commissioner vide his impugned order disallowed the Cenvat credit in respect of the following:

(3.) AS regards the kisan shed, it stands contended that the same are constructed for cane growers visiting the factory in relation to supply of sugarcane, submission of their bills and receipt of payment of its price, etc. In terms of U.P. Cane Purchase Act, it has become mandatory for the manufacturers of sugar to construct these sheds and any contravention of these provisions will attract criminal prosecution. As such, she submits that the same being a mandatory statutory requirement for the convenience of inputs supplier, the service is covered by the term ''procurement of inputs". She places reliance on the Tribunal's decision in the case of Stanzen Toyotetsu India Private Limited v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore III reported as : [2011] 44 VST 227 (CESTAT -Bang) : [2009] 92 RLT 208 (CESTAT -Bang), wherein by following the larger Bench decision in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai v. GTC Industries Ltd. as reported in : [2008] 89 RLT 197 (CESTAT -LB), in support of her above submissions.