2022 (11) TMI 1088
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the case, in brief, are that a team of Central Excise Officers visited the factory premises of appellant and documents related to Cenvat Credit availed on services received from various service providers were called. Upon the examination of the appellant's records/ documents it was noticed by the revenue authorities that the Appellant has received the services from various service provider for setting-up of factory. It appears that the Cenvat Credit on inputs used in the manufacture of prefabricated structure and Cenvat credit of input services on the taxable services such as Construction of Building, Erection Commissioning & Installation (Erection of Electric Tower From GEB to their factory premises) Architect Services, Real Estate Age....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to excise duty nor to the service tax. Thus the Cenvat Credit does not appear to be admissible. A detail show cause notice dated 07.02.2012 was issued proposing denial of Cenvat Credit of Rs. 4,62,52,447/- on inputs services and to recover the ineligible Cenvat credit of Service Tax paid on the disputed input services along with applicable interest and penalty. The said show cause notice was adjudicated vide impugned order wherein the Learned Adjudicating Authority confirmed the entire demand of ineligible Cenvat credit along with interest under Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules read with Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and imposed equivalent penalty under Rule 15(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules read with Section 11AC of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... • Lemon Tree Hotel 2018 (10) GSTL 241 (Tribunal) • Carrier Air Conditioning & Refrigeration 2016 (41) STR 824 (Tribunal) 4.2 Without prejudice he also submits that the period of dispute in the present case is 2008-2009. The definition of input services contained a phrase " activities related to business" as eligible activities to avail Cenvat Credit of input services. He placed reliance on judgments of Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. - 2009 (15) STR 657 (Bom) 4.3 He also submits that the service providers have classified their activity under the taxable category of construction services, erection, commissioning and installation services and architect services etc. The service tax was also paid by the service provider....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enue have reiterated the reasoning given by the adjudicating authority for denial of credit. He placed reliance on the following decisions. • Commissioner of C. Ex. Nagpur Vs. Manikgarh Cement - 2010 (20) STR 456 (Bom) • Maruti Suzuki Ltd. Vs. CCE , Delhi -II - 2009 (240) ELT 641 (Tri. LB)) • Vandana Global Ltd. Vs. Commr. Cx. Raipur - 2010 (253) ELT 440 (Tri. LB) • Commissioner of Chennai Vs. Sundaram Brake Linings 2010 (19) STR 172 (Tri. Chennai) • Tower Vision India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commr. Ex. 2016 (42) STR 249 • Fascel Ltd. Vs. CCE, Ahmedabad - 2017 (52) STR 434 (Tri. Ahem.) • Inox Air Products Ltd. Vs. CCE, Raigad 2014 (34) STR 29 (Bom) â€....


TaxTMI
TaxTMI