2019 (12) TMI 391

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Engineering Services, Neyveli & (iii) M/s.Ramana Logistics, Chennai. it was noticed that they had charged the assessee in the invoices towards service provided by them for operation and maintenance of thermal power station. However, the appellants have taken credit on such invoices claiming that the same are input service to them. A show cause notice dt. 22.10.2013 was issued to the appellants demanding cenvat credit of Rs. 52,77,007/- and seeking to impose the penalty under Rule 15 (2) of CCR 2004. The SCN was confirmed by Commissioner vide OIO No. 6/2014-ce dt.3.3.2014. 2. Ld. Consultant for the appellants submits that in terms of the agreement entered into by the appellants with their suppliers, the suppliers are required to maintain....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....37) STR 1074 (Tri.-Del.) (v) Metro Shoes Vs CCE 2008 (10) STR 382 (Tri.-Mumbai) 3. Per contra, Ld. A.R relies on the findings of the OIO and submits that the service is rendered in respect of the machinery installed by the appellants in the premises of thermal plant and as such have no nexus with the activity undertaken by the appellants in the factory for production of cement. She also submits that moreover the service, if any, rendered by the suppliers of fly ash are to be considered to be service rendered to thermal power stations and not to the appellants. Therefore, the appellants are not entitled to take credit on such services rendered by their suppliers. 4. Heard both sides and perused the records of the case. On goin....