2017 (7) TMI 411

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he service tax on various services correctly, prior to distribution of the services to its manufacturing unit or otherwise. 4. The adjudicating authority in the impugned order while denying the cenvat credit has recorded the following: "Stating that the original documents were not readily available, the ISD produced the same only on 17.10.2013 before the jurisdictional Range Officer. On getting the same verified, it is found that out of Rs. 34,79,187/-, only Rs. 23,76,398/- is allowable. The remaining credit is found not eligible as detailed below: Name of the service Name of service provider Sl.No. of the invoice in the statement Reason for ineligibility Credit involved (Rs.) Financial charges HDFC Bank 3 to 6, 173, 176, 179 to 1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....40/- excess in respect of two invoices at Sl.No. 152 & 154 of the said statement and Rs. 496/- ineligible amount in respect of invoice at Sl.No. 192 and hence those amounts have tobe disallowed. As regards the availment of credit on the documents issued by the HDFC Bank amounting to Rs. 1,02,830/-, it is the departments contention that the said documents do not contain the name of ISD or the factory, but are in the name of MCL Chennai. In such a case, distribution of credit on the basis of a document which is not in their name, is irregular on the part of ISD. The ISD argued that the HDFC renders various services in the name of MCL Chennai and they have taken that credit amount and passed on the same to the factory and as such the credit ....