9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (2) TMI 444 - AT - Central ExciseTour Operator Service - admissibility of input service credit on Tour Operator Service - the same has not been considered by the adjudicating authority and the adjudicating authority held that the Respondents are entitled to take input service credit on rent-a-cab service - Held that - In the absence of mentioning in the grounds of appeal that the adjudicating authority has not considered the admissibility of input service credit on Tour Operator Service. The appeal deserves no merits
Issues: Admissibility of input service credit on Tour Operator Service
Analysis: The judgment deals with the issue of whether the Respondents are entitled to take input service credit on Tour Operator Service. The learned SDR argued that the adjudicating authority did not consider this aspect, and therefore, the matter should be remanded for re-adjudication. However, upon examination of the case record, it was found that the appeal did not challenge the entitlement to input service credit on the activities related to manufacturing. The grounds of appeal did not include a prayer for remand on the specific issue of Tour Operator Service. The judge referred to a precedent set by the Hon'ble Mumbai High Court in a similar case, where it was established that input service credit on services availed in the course of manufacturing is admissible. Since the appeal did not raise the issue of Tour Operator Service credit admissibility explicitly, the judge found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it. In summary, the judgment clarifies that the entitlement to input service credit on Tour Operator Service was not a ground of challenge in the appeal. The judge relied on a precedent from the Hon'ble Mumbai High Court to establish the admissibility of input service credit on services related to manufacturing activities. As the specific issue regarding Tour Operator Service credit was not raised in the appeal, the judge dismissed the appeal, emphasizing the importance of clearly articulating the grounds of challenge in such cases.
|
