2017 (11) TMI 427

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... As such the Revenue held that since the cenvatable invoices were not eligible for grant of Cenvat credit, the proposal was made in the SCN to deny the credit. 2. The original adjudicating authority confirmed the demand to the extent of Rs. 32,91,615/- and also imposed penalty. On appeal against the above order, the appellants could get the invoices rectified and get their name included in the invoices from the service provider. Based upon such rectified invoices the appellate authority granted relief to the appellants to the extent of Rs. 22.00 lakhs but, rejected the balance of Rs. 10.00 lakhs credit on the ground that the appellants have not been able to establish that the said services were actually received by them and were consumed....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nstead of rejecting the appeal on the ground that invoices have not been got rectified. Further, the Ld. Advocate submits that the balance amount of Rs. 6.00 lakhs was never availed by them as Cenvat credit but fairly agrees that such plea was never taken before the original adjudicating authority nor before the Commissioner (Appeals) in the earlier proceedings. However, he submits that this is a fact related issue and may be re-examined by the lower authority. 7. The above plea of the appellant stands strongly contested by the Ld. DR who submits that the appellants have taken the above plea for the first time before the Tribunal, even though the matter has made number of rounds before the lower authorities. Such pleas should not be allo....