2010 (5) TMI 235

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....a, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order (Oral)]. - This is an appeal by the Department against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) No. 15-CE/MRT-II/2008 dated 24-1-2008. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The relevant facts, in brief, are that the appellant received services from two of the service providers, Khan Contractors and Alok Labour Organisation who have paid service tax under the Head "Man-....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ice tax under the Head "Man-power Recruitment Service"  and the same is not in dispute and therefore, the credit has been taken by them validly. She relies on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of C.C.E., Chennai v. Carborandum Universal Ltd. reported in 2009 (16) S.T.R. 181 (Tri.-Chennai) and the decision in the case of Mahaveer Surfactants (P) Ltd. v. C.C.E., Pondicheery reported in 2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he jurisdiction of Single Member Bench. 7. It is observed that the Cenvat credit is denied to the appellant under the presumption that the provider of services need not have paid service tax under the Head "Man-power Recruitment Service". Learned Advocate has shown a letter written by the jurisdictional Superintendent in-charge of the service provider M/s. Khan Contractors directing them to pay....