2019 (3) TMI 1217

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....unts on one of the service providers of the appellant, it was noticed that the service provider namely M/s. Sunmar Constructions had constructed roads for the appellant inside the factory premises. M/s. Sunmar Constructions had paid service tax on the construction activities provided to the appellant and the service tax was also collected from the appellant. The appellant then availed credit of the service tax being input service for them. The department was of the view that construction of roads does not amount to Commissioner or Industrial Construction Service and that the construction of roads is specifically excluded in the said definition. That M/s. Sunmar Constructions ought not to have paid service tax on the said services. The credi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....missioner of Central Excise, Chennai - 2018 (8) TMI 1691 Madras HC. 3. The ld. AR Shri S. Govindarajan supported the findings in the impugned order. He adverted to the definition of CICS in section 65(25)(b) of Finance Act, 1994 and argued that services provided in respect of construction of roads does not fall within the ambit of the said definition. He referred to section 66 of the said Act and submitted that the assessee can avail credit only of the service tax that is paid when the services are leviable to service tax. In the present case, services / activities are not liable to service tax and therefore the credit availed has been rightly rejected. If at all M/s. Sunmar Constructions can apply for refund. 4. Heard both sides. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... goods to the respondent paid excise duty on such product under mistaken belief. In law as declared by the Supreme Court in case of Collector of Central Excise, Patna v. Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. (supra), no duty was payable on such product. Strictly speaking therefore, such amount deposited by the original manufacturer would not partake the character of excise duty. However, when the department did not dispute the classification of such manufacturer, accepted the declarations and duties, Cenvat credit on such duty cannot be declined to the purchaser of the goods who otherwise fulfilled all conditions tor availing Cenvat credit thereof." 6. So also the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. MDS Switch....