2018 (5) TMI 1506

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oods viz. "various bio-technology products such as enzymes, antibodies, proteins, DNAs, reagents, educational kits, research kits, cell culture chemicals etc." falling under chapter sub-heading 30021019, 35079069 of CETA, 1985. They are availing the input service tax credit facility under CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, They are also undertaking trading activities from the premises and depots. During AG's audit, it was observed that the appellants have availed the common input service tax credit of Rs. 26,18,990/- during the period April 2007 to October 2009 on common input services like building rent, security services, maintenance services, financial services etc. at the sales office and depots. They have an input service distributor (SD) ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....MAD-ST] and also the decision of the High Court in the case of FL Smidth Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE [2014-TIOL-2186-HC-MAD-CX]. He has conceded that on merit, he has no case since the Hon'ble High Court of Madras has held that trading is an exempted services even prior to 01/04/2011 and therefore the assessee is liable to reverse the CENVAT credit relating to trading activities. He further submitted that there is no suppression on the part of the appellant and the Department has wrongly invoked the larger period of limitation in issuing the show-cause notice. He  further submitted that there has been periodical audit during the relevant period and it has not been pointed out by the audit that the appellants are not entitled to take CENVAT c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....also submitted that this Tribunal in the case of Micro Labs Ltd. [Final Order Nos.21265-21285/2016 dt. 23/11/2016] has also taken the view that the input service credit was used in relation to trading activity. This amounts to suppression of fact and therefore extended period of limitation is correctly invoked as the appellant was falling under the self-assessment procedure and they are taking the credit on their own. 6.   After considering the submissions of both sides and perusal of material on record, I find that there is no infirmity in the impugned order invoking extended period of limitation. Further I find that the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of FL Smidth Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has also upheld the decision of the ....