2018 (11) TMI 1027

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vices for availment of CENVAT Credit. 2. Today when the matter came up for hearing, Ld. Advocate Shri. M. Kannan appeared for the appellant and Ld. AC (AR) Shri. R. Subramaniyan appeared for the Revenue; I have heard the rival contentions, perused the documents placed on record and have gone through the decisions relied on during the course of hearing. 3.1 The details of input services involved against which the credit was sought by the assessee but denied by the Revenue, for the relevant periods of dispute, are as under : Sl. No. Appeal No. Period of Dispute Input Service Credit/Penalty (in Rs.) 1. E/42208/2017 12/2014 to 03/2015 • Rent paid for storage of materials at TVS Logistics godown, Puzhal, C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t could not place any material on record in support of its claim that the aforesaid services were in fact used by the appellant being the service provider for providing output service. 4. Per contra, Ld. AR submitted in response that even before the lower appellate authority, no documentary evidence was produced in support of their claim. 5. I have to therefore dismiss the above ground of the appellant for the reason that the appellant has not produced any documents in support before the lower authorities and the only irresistible conclusion that could be drawn is that the appellant has not proved nexus and therefore hit by Rule 2(l) as amended. 6. With regard to the Manpower Supply Service which is a common ground in respect of Ap....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lated to the survey of the appellant's process time conducted at sub-contractor's end for which professional charges were paid, which had suffered service tax. He further explained that the process time is always the time consumed by a sub-contractor for processing of job work entrusted to such sub-contractor and therefore, the said service received would always be in relation to processing of appellant's excisable goods at its sub-contractor's premises. 9. Per contra, Ld. AR supported the findings of the lower authorities. 10. I have considered the rival contentions. I find from the impugned Order that as observed hereinabove, the only reason given by the Revenue is that the service was rendered at the sub-contractor's end. It is not....