TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (5) TMI 463
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....JUDGEMENT The respondent is manufacturer of excisable goods and they avail the benefit of CENVAT credit scheme. In this appeal, the CENVAT credit taken by the respondent in respect of 5 different services during the period June 2008 to March 2011 is under dispute. The services involved and the amount involved against each service are as below :- 1) Air Travel Agent service &....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....p; Rs.19,256 2. Revenue was of the view that the above services have no nexus with the manufacturing activities and therefore service tax paid on the services could not have been availed by the respondent. Accordingly, Show Cause Notices were issued and demands confirmed. The Commissioner held that these services had proximate nexus wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se Notice. Ld. AR points out that in respect of other three services, the position is much worse inasmuch as the Commissioner has not given any specific finding at all. So submits that the matter be remanded for examination of factual evidence to support the claim. 4. The Ld. counsel for the respondent submits that as far as Air Travel Agent services and Rent-a-cab services are concerned, they ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ered the submissions on both sides. I find that entire matter starting from SCN has been disputing only the legal issue whether Rent-a-cab service or Air Travel Agent service is covered by the definition of input services. The SCN itself does not state how Rent-a-cab service was used. The Commissioner has accepted the reply of the respondent. Now in the appeal filed by Revenue, they have not subm....