2017 (6) TMI 844

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rs of bulk drug/active pharmaceutical ingredients etc. falling under Chapter 28 of the 1st Schedule to the CETA 1985. During the course of verification of the records of the appellant by the department audit, it was noticed that the appellants have wrongly availed CENVAT credit service tax paid on certain services. Thereafter a show-cause notice dated 1.10.2013 was issued to the appellants with a proposal for demanding wrongly availed credit along with appropriate interest and imposing penalty under Rule 15(2) of the CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act 1944. The original authority vide order-in-original allowed the credit to the tune of Rs. 2,86,190/- in respect of courier service and held that the cred....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 1,65,457.00 Consultancy service relating to construction Nil 31,004.00 Total 15,22,126.00 4,10,089.00   He further submitted that the impugned order has wrongly held that these services do not fall in the definition of input service whereas these services are input services and the same have been used in the business of the appellant. He further submitted that till 31.3.2011 the definition of input service included not only services used by a manufacturer, whether directly or indirectly, in or in relation to the manufacture of final product, and clearance of final product up to the place of removal but also any service contained in 2nd para of Rule 2(l)(2) of the CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 which included such ser....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....support of this, he relied upon the following decisions: 1) Modern Petrofils Vs CCE [2010(253)ELT 609(Tri-Mum)] 2) Pearl Engineering Polymers Ltd Vs CCE [2016 STR 773(Tri-Mum)] On the other hand learned A.R. reiterated the findings of the impugned order. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the records, I find that the credit availed on out-door catering prior to 1.4.2011 is allowed as input service and appellant has not claimed any CENVAT Credit after 1.4.2011 in the present case. As far as outward freight is concerned, the appellant has claimed credit till 31.3.2011 and also after 1.4.2011 but has not produced sufficient proof by way of documents and with regard to this input service, t....