TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (10) TMI 1418
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ST dated 20.06.2012 (Serial No. 8). The case of the department is that service provided by service provider does not fall under the category of Works Contract Service and therefore, the appellant is not required to pay 50% of service tax on reverse charge mechanism. It is also alleged in the show cause notice that service received by the appellant is not input service in terms of definition of Input Service under Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Accordingly, the service tax paid by the appellant under reverse charge mechanism, and availed Cenvat credit thereof, the said Cenvat credit was disallowed. Therefore, the present appeal. 2. Shri Vinay Kansara, ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that in the order-in-ori....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ld. Deputy Commissioner (AR) reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 4. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides and perused the record. I find that in the show cause notice, the credit was proposed to be denied on the ground that the Input Service received by the appellant does not fall under the definition of Input Service. As regards this issue, the Adjudicating Authority in the order-in-original in Para 15.2, has categorically held that the service received by the appellant is Input Service. The said Para is reproduced below:- "15.2 In respect of other service providers, I find that the assessee have given details of work performed by them in a table as given in Para 10.12 above. On perusal of above a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....any property in goods in execution of the said contracts. I find that at the time of audit also, Shri Sushil Nair, unit head had submitted that the service providers had not used any goods for providing services except tools and tackles and that whenever any good was required for providing service, the same had been provided by the factory only and its value had not been included in the value charged by the assessee for payment of service tax. Thus I find that the assessee was not liable to pay service tax on such service s received under reverse charge mechanism and accordingly suo-motto Cenvat credit of such service tax paid was also not available to them." Therefore, the issue of admissibility of input service has been settled in the or....