Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2010 (10) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2010 (10) TMI 290 - AT - Central Excise


Issues:
1. Denial of cenvat credit on HR Plates, coils, and jointing sheets.
2. Denial of input service credit on rent a cab service, maintenance, and repair of motor car.
3. Denial of input service credit on mandap keeper service.

Analysis:
1. The appellant appealed against the denial of cenvat credit on HR Plates, coils, and jointing sheets, along with the imposition of penalties. The appellant's representative argued that a previous Tribunal order and a decision of the Rajasthan High Court supported their claim for cenvat credit. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant, citing the previous order that allowed the credit, which had not been challenged by the department, thus entitling the appellant to the cenvat credit on HR Plates, coils, and jointing sheets.

2. The denial of input service credit on rent a cab service and maintenance and repair of motor car was also contested. The appellant's representative argued that these services were essential for the business activities, as employees were transported from residences to the business premises for procurement purposes. The Tribunal referenced a previous case to support the appellant's claim, stating that these services qualified as input services. Consequently, the appellant was deemed entitled to input service credit for rent a cab service and maintenance and repair of motor car.

3. The denial of input service credit on mandap keeper service was also challenged. The appellant had booked a hall for their Annual General Meeting, which was considered a business activity. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant was entitled to credit for the mandap keeper service as it was directly related to their business activities. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates