2015 (9) TMI 1222

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....brief facts of the case are that appellant is the manufacturer of sugar and molasses. As the factory is located in the remote area and they need technicians / engineers for maintenance of their plant and machinery. Therefore they constructed dormitory within the factory for stay of these technicians / engineers as same may be called as and when if there is a fault in the plant or machinery. For construction of this dormitory, the appellant took Cenvat Credit on construction services which was sought to be denied by the revenue on the premise that the same does not qualify as input service as per Rule 2(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004. The show cause notices were issued and the same were adjudicated which were converted into the impugned ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1(22) S.T.R. 289 (Tri-Mumbai). He further submitted that in their own case for the earlier period this tribunal has held that the appellant is entitled to take cenvat credit of the impugned input service vide Order No. 54918/2004 Ex(SM) dated 29.12.2014. 3. On the other hand the Ld. AR opposes the contention of the ld. Counsel and submits that the dormitory is located outside the factory premises as alleged in the show cause notice. Further the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Manikgarh Cement (Supra) is applicable to the facts of the case. Therefore, appellant is not entitled to take Cenvat Credit. He further submits that the construction service is not included in the inclusive part of the Rule 2(1) of Ce....