2019 (12) TMI 1496

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e input services received for use in or in relation to the final Products, cannot be utilized by the appellant for dis-charging its Service Tax liability on account of the output service rendered by it, inasmuch as the input services for which the Appellant had no nexus or integral connection with the output service rendered by the appellant. 3. The Adjudicating Authority dis-allowed the Cenvat Credit taken and confirmed the demand of Service Tax amounting to Rs. 5,52,532/- along with appropriate interest and imposed penalty of equal amount under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Rule 15 (3), CCR Rules, 4. On appeal, the Lower Appellate Authority upheld the Adjudication Order and rejected the appeal. Hence, the present app....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Tax, would have raised a substantial question of law. However, we find that the Tribunal has arrived at a conclusion that the credit is admissible during the course of manufacture of the final product of duty paid on inputs as well as service tax on the input service availed of. While availing of that credit, the cross utilization is not ruled out, leave alone barred or prohibited. That is how Cenvat Credit Rules have been analyzed. Rule 3(1) of the Rules provides that the manufacturer or producer of final products or a provider of output service shall be allowed to take credit on various duties and that is the substantive provision in the rules. That is titled "Cenvat credit". That takes within its fold the duty of excise, other duties an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... embargo, the Tribunal's order does not call for any interference. The interpretation placed on the Rule is a probable and a possible view. That cannot be termed as perverse. Further, there is no revenue deficit muchless any loss. Hence, we do not think that the appeal deserves to be entertained. It does not raise any substantial question of law. Hence, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs." 7. By considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods and also providing various services for which they are also registered with the Service Tax Department. The appellant has availed cenvat credit on inputs, capital goods and also....