2019 (4) TMI 1006

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Podwal, Superintendent (AR) For the Respondent ORDER Per: S.S GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 22.02.2018 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeal of the appellant. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant is manufacturer of tungsten and molybdenum wires and was availing the cre....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....issioner who rejected the same. Hence the present appeal. 2. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 3. Learned consultant appearing for the appellant submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without properly appreciating the facts and the law. He further submitted that the service of the car was carried out on the vehicle which is used ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the services involved in the present case. 5. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that the repair service of the car which is used to ferry the employees inside the factory and also used for material for work-in-progress is eligible as the same is indirectly related to the manufacture. Similarly the repair of the MD car is also in ....