2017 (3) TMI 505

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... matter was adjudicated resulting in confirmation of demand along with interest of Rs. 95,223/- and penalty of Rs. 3,65,740/-. In appeal, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the adjudication order. Aggrieved by which, the appellants are before this Tribunal. In the present appeal, the prayer is for waiver of interest and the penalty imposed on the appellants. 3. The Ld. Advocate for the appellants submits that the Show Cause Notice was issued on 23.02.2011 while the credit was taken in April 2007. The same was reflected in ER-1 and there was neither willful evasion nor intent to evade because the appellant was in bona-fide belief that it was eligible services for taking Cenvat Credit. Besides, the appellants are Govt. of India undertak....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ment 2010 (20) STR 456, held a contrary view, and held that service tax paid on maintenance and repair of the housing colony is not an eligible input service . The decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay has to be followed by this Tribunal as being the Jurisdictional High Court. 8. Further, I find that in the Tribunal decision in the case of Reliance Industries (supra), the benefit of Cenvat Credit on repair/maintenance services was allowed on the basis of cost accountant certificate indicating the expenses incurred for setting up the townships and various expenses for maintenance and these were reflected in the Balance Sheet. This judgment was distinguished by the Tribunal from the judgement of Manikgarh Cement (supra) solely on th....