Tribunal denies Cenvat credit for non-manufacturing services, directs partial duty deposit.

The tribunal upheld the decision disallowing Cenvat credit for duty paid on CHA and courier services not directly related to manufacturing or clearance at the factory gate. The appellant's argument for credit based on export purposes was rejected as the services were for export after goods clearance, not manufacturing. The tribunal directed the appellants to deposit 60% of the duty demanded within eight weeks, with the remaining amount of duty, interest, and penalty waived until appeal disposal, with compliance due by 26-8-2011.

---

---

Issues: Application for stay in appeal against order disallowing Cenvat credit.

Analysis:
1. The appeal arose from an order dated 7-4-2010 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Delhi, dismissing the appeal against the order of the Additional Commissioner, Gurgaon dated 8-9-2009, which disallowed Cenvat credit of Rs. 40,61,670 along with recovery, interest, and penalty.

2. The appellant relied on various decisions to contest the denial of credit, arguing that the authorities erred in disallowing the credit. However, the department contended that the authorities correctly handled the issue and disallowed the credit as per the facts of the case.

3. The adjudicating authority and lower appellate authority found that the credit for duty paid on CHA services and courier services was inadmissible as they were not related to the manufacture or clearance of goods at the factory gate. The claim was for services utilized at the loading point for export purposes, which did not qualify for credit under the Central Excise Act.

4. The appellant's argument that credit is available for export purposes was countered by the clear finding that the services in question did not relate to the manufacture of the product but were specifically for export after the goods were cleared. Therefore, the claim for Cenvat credit was not valid.

5. The tribunal found no prima facie case for a total waiver of the amount demanded under the impugned order. Accordingly, the appellants were directed to deposit 60% of the duty demanded within eight weeks, with the balance amount of duty, interest, and penalty waived until the appeal's disposal. Compliance was required by 26-8-2011.

---