2015 (1) TMI 1336

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent of service tax during the period October 2005 to March 2006, proposing confirmation of interest. The dispute about the CENVAT credit of around Rs. 2.27 crores also was raised for which purpose a show-cause notice was issued holding that the said credit is not available as the appellant had not produced the proper invoices and documents on the basis of which the same was availed. 2. It is seen that the matter travelled up to the Tribunal and the dispute as regards interest was settled vide Final order No. 461/2010 dated 13/01/2010. However as regards, the CENVAT credit, the matter remanded with the following observations: 5.5. As regards the Cenvat Credit availed by the appellant on the service tax paid on the services receiv....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....that the adjudicating authority, while passing the present impugned order, has not disputed the validity of the documentary evidences for the purpose of grant of CENVAT credit. However he disallowed the credit in respect of e-filing of income tax returns, car repair, generator rent, printing and clearing charges on the ground that the same cannot be held to be cenvatable input services. 5. The grievance of the appellant is that the Revenues entire case in the show-cause notice was on the allegation of non-production of documentary evidences. The Tribunal while remanding the matter, directed the lower authorities to consider the auditors certificates, which were given after verification of the records into consideration and to allow the c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....round itself. 8. In any case, I find that all the disputed services have been held to be cenvatable input services by various courts. Reference can be made to the Honble Karnataka High Courts decision in the case of CCE Bangalore Vs Millipore India (P) Ltd [2011 (16) taxman.com 363 (Kar)] as also to another decision of the said High Court in the case of CCE Bangalore Vs Stanzen Toyotetsu India (P) Ltd. [2011-TIOL-866-HC-KAR-ST] as also in the case of Toyota Kirloskar Motor Pvt Ltd Vs CCE LTU Bangalore [2011-TIOL-941-HC-KAR-ST]. As such I agree with the learned advocate that denial of credit in respect of the disputed services, which were admittedly used in relation to the business are covered by the definition of input services. 9. Ho....