2024 (6) TMI 1263

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....llant is a manufacturer of plastic processing machinery and spares falling under Chapter 84 of CETA, 1985. On scrutiny of their records, it was noticed that they had taken credit of service tax paid on various inadmissible services during the period from April 2010 to March 2012. As the said services were not related to the manufacture of final products, Show Cause Notice dated 23.8.2012 was issued proposing to disallow and recover the credit of Rs.4,03,207/- under sec. 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 along with interest and to impose equal penalty. After due process of law, the original authority reduced the demand to Rs.2,81,742/- with interest and equal penalty. Appellant preferred appeal before the first appellate authority who afte....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... through each of the them to show that they were integrally connected with the ultimate production of goods. Sl. No Particulars Amount involved (Rs) 1 Accommodation services provided to Engineers 442 2 Brand Promotion 41,556 3 Modification and partition work of office space inside the factory area 9,484 4 Roofing work for factory sheds in order to maintain the temperature 11,593 5 Employees reimbursement of expenses 2,035 6 Aluminium partition work inside the factory for the supervisors 1,09,774 7 Service charges for copier machines inside the factory 325 8 Electrical work inside the factory area 8,549 9 Forex consultancy services 9,270 10 Servic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2010 (10) TMI 13 - Bombay High Court She further submitted that they were under a bonafide belief that they are eligible for ITC on the aforesaid impugned services and therefore for this reason itself, it can be inferred that the Appellant does not have an "intention to evade tax" and therefore extended period of limitation cannot be invoked against the Appellant. She stated that the demand and penalties against the appellants cannot be sustained and prayed that further proceedings in the matter be dropped. 3.2 The learned Authorized Representative for the respondent, reiterated the points given in the impugned order and prayed that the appeal may be rejected. 4. Heard the rival parties I find that the expression "activities in or....