2019 (7) TMI 768

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., and they were providing Service of Authorised Service Station, etc. Further, the issue is whether the extended period of limitation has been rightly invoked. 3. The brief facts are that w.e.f. 1.4.2011, under Notification No.3/2011-CE, Explanation was inserted in Rule 2(e) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 to the effect that trading was defined as an exempted service. 4. Prior to amendment in rule 2(e) by the aforementioned notification w.e.f. 1.4.2011, the view taken by this Tribunal in similar matters was that the assessee was entitled to take cenvat credit under Rule 2(I) of CCR, as was held particularly in the following cases:- (I) CCE, Tirupathi Vs.Shariff Motors -2010 (18)66 (Tribunal- Bang.) (II) The said order of the Tribunal....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to trading of vehicles and the same cannot be construed as an "input service" for the 'authorized service station'. Thus, it appeared that the appellant is liable to reverse the cenvat credit of Rs. 13,11,277/- on the total cenvat credit taken during the period under dispute, amounting to Rs. 15,13,101/-, which included other input services like mobile phone service, courier service, insurance service, audit service, purchase of fixed assets service, banking service, etc. 6. The appellant contested the show cause notice, both on merits and on limitation. The show cause notice was adjudicated vide order-in-original dated 13.10.2017, and the proposed demand was confirmed with equal amount of penalty. 7. Being aggrieved, the appellant prefer....