9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (4) TMI 349X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r catering service which was used for supply of food to factory employees during the period January 2005 to September 2007. The lower authorities have held that outdoor catering service cannot be said to be an ‘input service’ within the ambit of this term defined under rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.In the light of the decision of CCE v. GTC Industries Ltd. 2008 -TMI - 31592 - CESTAT M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to Rs. 35,000. The above credit had been taken by the assessee on outdoor catering service which was used for supply of food to factory employees during the period January 2005 to September 2007. The lower authorities have held that outdoor catering service cannot be said to be an 'input service' within the ambit of this term defined under rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. According to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ervices' given under rule 2(l). With reference to the Tribunal's Larger Bench decision in the case of CCE v. GTC Industries Ltd. [2008] 17 STT 63 (Mum. - CESTAT), the SDR submits that CAS-4 principles were wrongly applied in that case. 2. After considering the grounds or this appeal and submissions of the SDR, I have no option but to follow the Larger Bench decision in GTC Industries Ltd.'s case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
