2015 (8) TMI 1345

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r the Respondent ORDER Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of paints, falling under Chapter 32 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.  The appellant's factory is located in the District of Bhiwadi, Alwar and the head office in Delhi.  The appellant avails cenvat credit of service tax paid by the head office on the input services.  Duri....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....since the ISD invoices were issued by the head office after registration and the service tax paid on the disputed services were taken as cenvat credit by the appellant in its factory, cenvat credit cannot be denied in absence of any specific stipulation/ prohibition contained in the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.  He further submits that input service distributed by the head office have been duly....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is Tribunal in the case of M/s NITCO Ltd. vs CCE Raigad reported in 2014 (34) STR 835 and Mangalore Refinery & Petrochemicals vs CCE Mangalore reported in 2013 (30) STR 475 (Tri. Bang).  She also submits that since the appellant has taken the credit in their Bhiwadi Factory, the proceedings have been rightly initiated by the service tax authorities having jurisdiction over the factory at Bhiw....