2014 (3) TMI 406

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e applicant is engaged in the business of providing telecommunication service. During the period Apr'05 to Sept. '07, they had availed CENVAT credit on certain goods like cables claimed by them to be capital goods. Details of the disputed good are not seen in the SCN or impugned order. These items were installed at the subscriber's premises. Revenue was of the view the applicant could ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ld have been received in the premises of service provider for taking credit. The only condition is that capital goods should have been used in providing output services. The difference in the wording of the definition as in relation to a manufacturer of excisable goods vis-à-vis., a service provider is to be taken note of. In Rule 3(5) of CENVAT Credit Rules, there was a provision that if t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....spute about it. He, therefore, argues that the appeal may be admitted without any pre-deposit. 3. Opposing the prayer, the learned Authorized Representative for the Revenue submits that during the relevant time Rule 3(5) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, required that if capital goods were removed from the premises of the service provider and such capital were not received back within 180 days CENV....