2026 (8) TMI 1137

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....that the invoices raised by the service provider was in the name of the Head Office and was not in the name and address of the Appellant, a Show Cause Notice was issued alleging that the Head Office of the Appellant was not registered as ISD. Therefore, it was alleged that the Appellant has taken the credit based on the documents which are not specified as proper eligible document under Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. After due process, the lower authorities have confirmed the demand of Rs.3,32,211/-. 3. In the grounds of appeal, the Appellant submits that during the period under dispute, there was no provision to the take the view that the input service has to be distributed only on proportionate basis. In this case the Appella....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....invoices issued in the name of their head office, in view of the fact that the head office was not registered as input service distributor and respondent have more than one units, proceedings were initiated which culminated into confirmation of demand and imposition of penalty by the original adjudicating authority. On an appeal filed by the respondents, Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal relying upon the decisions of this Tribunal in the case of Jindal Photo Limited - 2009 (240) E.L.T. 728 (Tri.-Ahmd.) 2009 (14) S.T.R. 812 (Tri.-Ahmd.) and Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills Limited - 2004 (174) E.L.T. 427 (Raj.). .............................. 3. I have considered the submissions. I find that the decision in the ca....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... input services. It is the duty of the executives to implement the provisions of rules and if there is any problem in implementing the rules, the rules have to be got amended but certainly the submissions like this not called for. In view of the fact that the ratio is covered by the decision of this Tribunal and I do not find anything wrong with the decision of the Commissioner in following the same and I also find the submission that why this decision is not applicable are not at all correct, I find no merit in the appeal filed by the Revenue and accordingly reject the same." 8. In the case of Doshion Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad, cited supra, the Bench has held as under :- "5. We have considered the submis....