2015 (9) TMI 620
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....kur: This appeal has been filed by the Appellant against OIA No. CCEA-SRT-II/SSP-223/u/s35A(3), dt.07.01.2013, under which OIO No.37/NKS-JC/DIV-II ANK/DEM/2011, dt.21.09.2011 passed by the Adjudicating authority has been upheld. The issue involved is regarding credit taken by the Appellant with respect to ISD invoices issued by the Head Office of the Appellant at Mumbai. First Appellate Authority....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aise demand with respect to ISD invoice issued by their Head Office at Mumbai. That the only requirement for taking credit is that ISD invoice should be issued by the Head Office and should contain all the details as prescribed by the Rules. He relied upon the case law of CCE Vs Godfrey Philips India Ltd [2009 (14) STR 375 ((Tri-Ahmd). It was his case that the Appellant s Headquarter is filing ret....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by the learned Advocate of the Appellant that the period involved in the present appeal is March 2008, which is before the date of amendment of Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004. He relied upon the case law of this Bench in the case of Cadmac Machinery Co. (P) Ltd Vs CCE Ahmedabad [2013 (31) STR (Tri-Ahmd)], where an activity in relation to valuation of property was considered to be an activi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....edit on the ground that the services of Professional Fees & Brokerage for sale of Land is not in relation to manufacturing activity and is not eligible for CENVAT Credit. It is observed from the case records that the period involved in the present proceedings is March 2008 when the words activity relating to business were existing in the definition of input services given under Rule 2(l) of CENVAT....
TaxTMI
TaxTMI