TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 1238
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pondent-Revenue ORDER Per: Dr. D.M. Misra Heard both sides. 2. This Appeal is filed against the Order-in-Appeal No.VAD-EXCUS-001-APP-100/2015-16 dated 21.5.2015 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals I), Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Vadodara. 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Appellants are engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods falling under Chapter 84 and 94....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....efore the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), who in turn, rejected their Appeal. Hence, the present Appeal. 4. Ld. Advocate Shri Dhaval K. Shah for the Appellant argued that the input services common to manufacturing as well as activity of trading cannot be segregated, as the trading activity came to be considered an exempted service with effect from 1.4.2011 only. Therefore, common services used for du....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that undisputedly during the relevant period, the Appellant used common input service in the manufacture of dutiable good and also in activity of trading. Considering the trading activity as exempted service, demand notice was issued to recover the proportionate credit availed on the service tax paid on such input service attributable to trading activity during the relevant period. I find that in ....