2013 (8) TMI 1087

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Respondent JUDGEMENT The CENVAT credit of service tax in respect of Renting of Immovable Property Service availed by the appellant in respect of their Sales Office (as noticed by the lower authorities) has been denied on the ground that the same has no nexus with the manufacturing activities. The period involved is from June 2007 to June 2008 and amount involved is ₹ 5,22,145/-. 2.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... place of removal (depending on the definition during the relevant period). Further, he also relies on the decision of the Tribunal in the cases of National Engineering Industries Ltd. vs. Commissioner of C. Excise, Jaipur [2013 (30) S.T.R. 511 (Tri.-Del.)] and Bharat Fritz Werner Ltd. vs. Commissioner of C. Ex., Bangalore [2011 (22) S.T.R. 429 (Tri.-Bang.)] and submits that in both the cases, it ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e on which rent was paid with service tax and the credit was taken was accommodating the CEO, accounting staff, purchase department staff, sourcing staff, human resource department staff, etc. of the appellant. However, both the original authority as well as Commissioner (Appeals) simply proceeded to observe that the CENVAT credit of service tax was taken on sale office but absolutely there is no ....