2017 (6) TMI 907

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Respondent ORDER Per: S.S GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 29.9.2016 whereby the Commissioner (A) has rejected the refund of CENVAT credit of service tax on two input services viz., manpower recruitment and supply agency services and rent-a-cab scheme operator services. 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the appellant is a company registered ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ry 2008 to March 2008 under Notification No.5/2006-CE dated 14.3.2006. Pursuant to filing of refund claims, the Assistant Commissioner issued a show-cause notice proposing to reject the refund claim and after following due process of law, the Assistant Commissioner rejected the entire refund claims on the ground of lack of nexus and that there was no correlation between the FIRCs and the export in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... this, the appellant has filed the present appeal. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order rejecting the refund of CENVAT credit on rent-a-cab scheme operator service is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without considering the definition of input service as provided in Rule 2(l) of CCR, 2004. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the appellant and its imperative for the appellant to use such services in the course of carrying on the business activities. For this submission, he relied upon the decision of the Karnataka High Court in the case of CCE Vs. Stanzen Toyotetsu: 2011 (32) ELT 244 (Kar.). He also submitted that the department cannot adopt two different yardstick i.e., for deciding eligibility to claim CENVAT credit....