TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 386
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l adjudicating authority has been dropped by Commissioner (Appeals). The facts in brief relevant for present adjudication are as follows: 1.1 M/s. TPL Plastech Ltd., the appellant herein, is registered with Central Excise Department for manufacturing HDPE Pipes. The appellant has been clearing this Final product upon payments of duties and is also availing facilities of Cenvat credit on capital goods/input/input service and is utilizing the same for payment of Central Excise Duties. The appellant was also registered with service tax department. During the audit of the appellant for the period April 2016 to June 2017 it was observed that: (i) the appellant had supplied HDPE pipes to M/s. NCC Ltd. and to various other parties with....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s dropped the entire demand of excise duty as well as that of service tax. However has confirmed the order of reversal of Cenvat credit amounting to Rs.93,662/-. Department is not in appeal against the said order. However appellant being aggrieved is before this tribunal. 2. I have heard Ms. Surabhi Sinha, learned Advocate for the appellant and Shri Anuj Kumar Neeraj, learned Authorized Representative for the department. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the present appeal is limited to the issue of availment of Cenvat credit on 2 major input services: (i) Technical inspection charge by BIS (ii) Outward Courier Services 3.1 It is submitted that both the services were used by the appellant directl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Castro India Ltd., Cadila Healthcare (supra) etc. are not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case. It is submitted that in both those decisions their product was such that could not be cleared without the technical testings/ investigations. Commissioner (Appeals) after examining the definition of input service given under Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 has confirmed the demand /reversal of Cenvat credit amounting to Rs.93,662/- along with interest. Impressing upon no infirmity in the said order, appeal is played to be dismissed. 5. Having heard both the sides and perusing the entire records, I observe and hold as follows: 5.1 It is observed that the narrow scope of present adjudication is the eligibility ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vernment agency, the services cannot be denied to be the services availed in relation to the appellant's business. The department has not produced any evidence to show any other purpose for availment of those services. The law provides for availment of Cenvat credit of service tax paid on a service received in relation to a business. If such Cenvat credit is denied to a manufacturer qua a service received in relation to his business, it will be the manufacturer who will be burdend with additional charges on his business as it was appreciated by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of All India Federation of Tax Practitioners & Ors. Vs. Union of India reported as (2007) 7 SCC 527. 5.4 The only thing required to be examined was as to whether ....