2018 (5) TMI 1194

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bsp;Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Customs Built Turnkey Project items falling under chapter heading 8537 of First Schedule to the CETA, 1985 and they are availing CENVAT credit on inputs, capital goods and input services under CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 (CCR). During the course of audit of the records of the appellant by the internal audit wing, it was observed that on scrutiny of the appellant's sales invoices / profit & loss account that the appellant was engaged in trading activity which involved sale of goods under E-1 transaction i.e. goods directly delivered by the suppliers to the appellant's customer's site for use in the turnkey project executed by them. I....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... input services relating to trading activity as the appellant stopped availing CENVAT credit on common input services after the same was raised for the first time by the Department. He further submitted that the appellant was subjected to subsequent audit also but no periodical show-cause notices were issued against the appellant who stopped availing CENVAT credit on common input services from the time of audit dt. 18/02/2010. He further submitted that in the show-cause notice dt. 07/07/2015 issued in this case, the Revenue has failed to identify as to which are the common input services on which the appellant has taken the CENVAT credit. He also submitted that there is no suppression or misstatement with intention to evade payment of duty ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ities have failed to consider the precedent order No.3/2015 dt. 30/07/2015 involving the same issue but for the earlier period and in this order, it was held that there are for which the appellant has not taken any CENVAT credit during the period in dispute and the Department has not been able to bring any material on record showing that the appellant has availed cenvat credit on common input services viz. telephone, internet and courier service. Further I find that the statement of Shri B.A. Sridhar, Manager(Finance) dt. 03/07/2014 was wrongly interpreted by both the authorities below. The Manager(Finance) in his statement dt. 03/07/2014 has categorically stated that the appellants have not availed any CENVAT credit on the common input ser....