2017 (11) TMI 1169

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o-relating with the appellant. Accordingly, credit was wrongly availed. 2. Shri. Rejesh Ostwal, Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that uptill 17-3-2012 there was no provision for distribution of service on proportionate basis therefore till 17-3-2012 credit on the ISD invoice is admissible only if the condition of Rule 7 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 is satisfied with, which is not under dispute. In this regard he placed reliance in case of ECOF industries Ltd Vs. CCE[2010(17)STR 515(T)] which is affirmed by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court reported as [2013(29)STR 515(T)]. He also placed reliance on the decision of this Tribunal in case of M/s. Akzo Nobel India Ltd Vs. CCE Belapur[A/89619/17/SMB dated8-9-2017 wherein the matter for the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... In the facts of the present case above two conditions are satisfied as there is no charge that appellant have taken the credit more that service tax actually paid and appellant also not engaged in the manufacture exclusively of exempted goods or provision of exempted service, therefore for the period prior to 17-3-2012, in terms of above unamended Rule 7 credit is admissible. This issue has been dealt in detail in case of ECOF industries Ltd Vs. CCE[2010(17)STR 515(T)] which is affirmed by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court reported as [2013(29)STR 515(T)], therefore following the ratio of the said judgments and applying unamended Rule 7, I set aside the demand of Cenvat credit for the period up to 31-3-2012. After amendment Rule 7 on 17-3-....