2009 (12) TMI 185

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... failed to consider the evidence which had been produced by the appellant before him as regards the service tax paid which are categorized as “other charges”. He drew our attention to various evidence produced before the adjudicating authority. It is the submission that as regards reversal of service tax of Rs. 9.83 crores, they have paid interest also. They are not challenging the same. Held that- .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hereon and penalty under sections 76, 77 and under rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The issue involved is regarding eligibility of Cenvat credit on the service tax paid on various services which were received by the appellants at the regional offices at all over India. 2. The learned Chartered Accountant submits that out of the total demand of Rs, 3,85,56,552, the adjudicating authority co .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ered Accountant submits that these evidence were produced before the adjudicating authority, but he failed to consider the same. 5. We find that at this juncture, the appeal itself can be disposed of as the issue lies in a narrow compass. Accordingly, after waiving pre-deposit of the amounts involved in the matter, we take up the appeal for the disposal. 6. On a careful consideration of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X