TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (3) TMI 1059
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he appellants are engaged in the manufacture of excisable products viz., Synthetic Organic Dye Stuff, Synthetic Organic tanning substance, Acrylic-Polymer in primary forms and Synthetic Rubber, Factice in primary forms, etc., and are availing CENVAT credit on input and input services. CESTAT vide its Final Order dated 8.8.2013 ordered for de novo adjudication of show-cause notice dated 11.10.2010 issued to the appellant. In the de novo adjudication, the Joint Commissioner of Central Excise, Mangalore vide his Order-in-Original dated 24.7.2014 disallowed the CENVAT Credit of Rs. 9,49,661/- along with interest and imposed equal penalty. Aggrieved by the said Order-in-Original, appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (A) and the Commiss....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n of road and storm water drain/civil work at tanker parking facility within the factory during the period in dispute are for the trucks and tankers which are arriving inside the factory premises which either bring the inputs/any other materials and for carrying the final products / any other outgoing materials from the factory and the storm water drain to drain excess rain and ground water from impervious surfaces such as sidewalks, campus, roofs and parking lots, etc. She also submitted that such construction work are integral part of the manufacturing activity and are relating to the business activities of the appellant inasmuch as without the same the appellant cannot commercially carry out the business and the manufacturing activity. S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....espect to CENVAT credit on input services. 4.3 She also submitted that the issue involved is interpretation of provisions of CENVAT Credit Rules, hence penalty under Rule 15(3) is not sustainable. For this submission, she relied upon the following decisions: * Transafe Services Ltd. vs. CCE, Haldia: 2017 (3) GSTL 445 (Tri.-Kolkata)( * Accenture Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. CST, Mumbai: 2015 (40) STR 719 (Tri.-Mumbai) 5. On the other hand, the learned AR defended the impugned order and submitted that the activity of construction of road and storm water drain/civil work at tanker parking facility does not fall under the definition of input service As defined under Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 as the same are not integral part of the....