{"id":13660,"date":"2018-09-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2018-09-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2018-09-07T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2018-09-06T18:30:00","slug":"cubane-speciality-chemicals-pvt-ltd-versus-cct-medchal-gst","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/?p=13660","title":{"rendered":"Cubane Speciality Chemicals Pvt Ltd Versus CCT, Medchal \u2013 GST"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Cubane Speciality Chemicals Pvt Ltd Versus CCT, Medchal \u2013 GST<br \/>Central Excise<br \/>2018 (9) TMI 564 &#8211; CESTAT HYDERABAD &#8211; TMI<br \/>CESTAT HYDERABAD &#8211; AT<br \/>Dated:- 7-9-2018<br \/>E\/30104\/2018 &#8211; FINAL ORDER No. A\/31082\/2018<br \/>Central Excise<br \/>Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial)<br \/>\nFor the Appellant : Shri Lalit Mohan Chandna, Advocate<br \/>\nFor the Respondent : Shri P.S. Reddy, Asst. Commissioner\/AR<br \/>\nORDER<br \/>\nPER: M.V. RAVINDRAN<br \/>\n1. This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. HYD-EXCUSMD- AP2-056-17-18 dated 15.09.2017.<br \/>\n2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are, the appellants are engaged in manufacturing paper quality products, organic compounds and water treatment chemicals falling under Chapters 29 &#038; 38 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They registered with the Central Excise Department vide CER No.AADCC0379GXM001. They also registered with the Service Tax vide STR No.AADCC0379GSD001. The appellant is deemed manufacturer by virtue of Chapter Note 10 to Chapters 29 <\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">=  =  =  =  =  =  =  =<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><strong>Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong><BR>For full text:-<a href=\"https:\/\/www.taxtmi.com\/caselaws?id=366828\">Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">=  =  =  =  =  =  =  =<\/p>\n<p>d in paper and pulp industry and they also grants exclusive right to issue sub-licenses \/ user licences to corporate entries and \/ or individuals in the domestic territory and grants exclusive rights to apply for licenses to manufacture and sell the products.<br \/>\n4. The appellant has entered into a &#39;Confidentiality Agreement&#39; with M\/s Srivilas Hydrotech Pvt. Ltd., Bollaram (hereinafter referred to as M\/s Srivilas) and provided certain proprietary information relating to product formulations, technology etc. which they procured from M\/s Solute to M\/s Srivilas and getting certain goods manufactured for them as per their requirement. M\/s Srivilas manufacture the goods only for the appellants and they maintain confidentiality of the technical information what they received from the appellants.<br \/>\n5. The accounts of the appellant was audited by the authorities and objections were raised as regards availment of CENVAT credit of service tax paid by the appellant to M\/s Solute on the ground that th<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">=  =  =  =  =  =  =  =<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><strong>Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong><BR>For full text:-<a href=\"https:\/\/www.taxtmi.com\/caselaws?id=366828\">Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">=  =  =  =  =  =  =  =<\/p>\n<p>ges is used directly or indirectly in the manufacture of final products. He would draw my attention to the decision of Tribunal in the case of TATA Motors [2017 (50) STR 28] wherein identical issue was considered. He would submit that though initially appellant had indicated that there was understanding as a job worker between appellant and M\/s Srivilas but it was an arrangement of purchase of finished goods manufactured by M\/s Srivilas, but the fact remains that appellant had shared the technology procured by them from M\/s Solute, was sold by the appellant in smaller packs as deemed manufacturer. It is his further submission that the issue is also contested on limitation as appellant availed the CENVAT credit and informed the departmental authorities about the same in the monthly returns. The objection as raised by the audit party and demand on them in the show cause notice is blatantly time barred as they have taken the credit on 2011, 2012 &#038; 2013, while show cause notice was issued <\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">=  =  =  =  =  =  =  =<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><strong>Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong><BR>For full text:-<a href=\"https:\/\/www.taxtmi.com\/caselaws?id=366828\">Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">=  =  =  =  =  =  =  =<\/p>\n<p>hat there was an intention to avail ineligible CENVAT credit.<br \/>\n8. I have considered the submission made at length on both sides and perused the records.<br \/>\n9. On perusal of records the only issue that falls for consideration is whether the appellant is eligible to avail CENVAT credit of the service tax paid by him on Royalty charges paid to M\/s Solute. Undisputedly, appellant procured technology for manufacturing of speciality chemicals from M\/s Solute, paid royalty charges and discharged service tax. The appellant having no manufacturing capacity of his own got the finished goods manufactured from M\/s Srivilas by sharing the technology procured by them. After getting the bulk finished goods from M\/s Srivilas they re-packed and re-labelled the same from bulk quantity to retail packs and discharged the Central Excise Duty as deemed manufacturer.<br \/>\n10. On the above factual matrix, appellant had availed the CENVAT credit of the service tax paid on the procurement of technology from M\/s Solut<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">=  =  =  =  =  =  =  =<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><strong>Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong><BR>For full text:-<a href=\"https:\/\/www.taxtmi.com\/caselaws?id=366828\">Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">=  =  =  =  =  =  =  =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Cubane Speciality Chemicals Pvt Ltd Versus CCT, Medchal \u2013 GSTCentral Excise2018 (9) TMI 564 &#8211; CESTAT HYDERABAD &#8211; TMICESTAT HYDERABAD &#8211; ATDated:- 7-9-2018E\/30104\/2018 &#8211; FINAL ORDER No. A\/31082\/2018Central ExciseMr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) For the Appellant : Shri Lalit Mohan Chandna, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri P.S. Reddy, Asst. Commissioner\/AR ORDER PER: M.V. RAVINDRAN &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/?p=13660\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;Cubane Speciality Chemicals Pvt Ltd Versus CCT, Medchal \u2013 GST&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-13660","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13660","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=13660"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13660\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=13660"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=13660"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=13660"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}