TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (2) TMI 97
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ous input services on the ground of lack of nexus. Since in all these 11 appeals, the issues are almost identical, therefore all the 11 appeals are being disposed of by this present common order. Appeal No. OIA No. Period Involved Amount Services Involved E/20881/2014 No.664-665/2013 Apr. - June 2011 Rs.2,96,121/- Management, Maintenance and Repair (MMR); Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency; Renting of immovable property security service E/20882/2014 No.664-665/2013 July Sep. 2011 Rs.10,23,820/- -do- E/21624/2014 No.354/2012 Oct. Dec. 2011 Rs.2,63,504/- MMR; Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency; Renting of immovable property; technical testing & analysis; professional charges E/21626/2014 No.353/2012 Jan. Mar. 2012....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Recruitment or Supply Agency; Renting of Immovable property service; Security service; software maintenance; technical testing & analysis service; professional charges, commercial training and coaching; erection, commissioning and installation service; and cleaning service. Aggrieved by the Order-in-Original, the appellant filed appeal before the first appellate authority. The first appellate authority partially allowed the refund and rejected the refund with regard to the above said services. Aggrieved by the various impugned order passed by the Commissioner (A), the appellants have filed these appeals. 3 Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order den....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that the appellants have submitted the details of the persons employed in Mumbai office and they are basically technical engineers closely connected with the manufacturing operations. He further submitted that the sister concern Apotex Pharmachem (India) Pvt. Ltd. has not employed even a single person at the Mumbai office of the appellant. To this extent, he filed an affidavit of the MD stating that the employees working in Mumbai office belong to the appellant alone and not to any other company. The counsel further submitted that at their Mumbai office, following regulatory works is conducted. * Regulatory activity related to review of commercial documents, change control form for commercial production by Regulatory affairs. * Work on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....'s own case vide Final Order No.21411/2016 dated 16.12.2016 has allowed refund of the CENVAT credit of service tax paid on rent of Mumbai premises. He further submitted that each input service on which the refund has been denied has been held to be input service by various decisions of the Tribunal in the appellants own case and also in other cases decided by the tribunal and the High Court. Following are the services and the case laws supporting the nexus. Management, Maintenance & Repair Service * In appellants own case vide FO No.26617-26629/2013 dt 9.10.2013 * CCE vs. JK Cement Works Ltd.: 2009-TIOL-411-CESTAT-DELHI * Golden Tobacco Ltd. vs. CCE, Mumbai: 2013 (30) STR 594 * Cadila Healthcare Ltd. vs. CCE, Ahmedabad-II: 201....