2020 (2) TMI 174

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....entral GST & C. Excise, Nashik is assailed in this appeal. 2. Facts of the case that have given rise to this appeal is that appellant is a manufacturer of "piston ring" having its factory at Satpur Industrial Estate, Nasik. It had availed Cenvat Credit on tax paid for renting of immovable property at Delhi and Mumbai Branch ofices. During the period March 2010 to March 2013 Cenvat Credit amounting to Rs. 33,21,270/- was held, in the EA 2000 audit, to be inadmissible. Appellant was put to show cause notice, was demanded such duty along-with interest and equivalent penalty and adjudication order confirm the same with 50% penalty u/s Rule 15(2) of CCR 2004 read with section 11 AC(1)(b) of the Central Excise Act with reduced penalty option b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....OL (869) CESTAT (Madras), 2017 (47) STR (148) (Tri. Bangalore) and 2017 (52) STR (361) (Bom.) to support his stand that such marketing of product and sales promotion activities are included within input service definition and renting of premises outside the manufacturing factory unit is permissible. Therefore, he argued that the credits taken by the appellant were valid credit for which the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) is required to be set aside. 4. In response to such submissions, Learned Authorised Representative for respondent department Mr. Saikrishna Hatangadi submitted that activities undertaken in rented premises were beyond the place of removal of final products and being a company registered as ISD, appellant had ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng the demand, interest and penalty. However, going by the decision of this Tribunal in the case of I.P. Ring Ltd reported in 2017 TIOL, cited supra, such renting of immovable property services taken to be used as branch office for procurement of orders, delivery of goods, repair and maintenance service as well as for marketing purpose are admissible credits for both pre and post amendment period covering the entire disputed period in the appeal. Moreover, appellant had replied to the query of the respondent department concerning its registration as ISD in which case, as an input service distributor, it had the discretion to distribute the inputs but the Commissioner (Appeals) had not believed its reply by observing that appellant was using....