Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether CENVAT credit on the disputed services used in the cement factory, especially after the post-01.04.2011 amendment to the input service definition, was admissible and whether the matter required fresh verification of the work orders and invoices.
Analysis: The appellant produced work orders and invoices showing that the services included operation and maintenance of DG sets, electrical work, shifting of high-tension lines, erection of weigh bridges, cable laying, maintenance of electrical equipment, and fabrication and erection work. These documents were not specifically examined in the appellate order. Since the eligibility of credit depended on the actual nature and use of the services, the disputed records had to be verified to determine whether the services fell within the scope of input service even after the amendment effective from 01.04.2011.
Conclusion: The matter was required to be remanded for verification of the work orders, invoices, and utilisation of services, and the impugned order was not sustained on the existing record.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the records necessary to decide eligibility of input service credit are not properly examined, the dispute must be sent back for factual verification before a final finding is recorded.