2011 (9) TMI 510

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , the short question to be considered is whether the lower appellate authority is legally right in having allowed the respondent to avail CENVAT credit on Outdoor Catering service used by them to provide food to their employees during the period of dispute. The original authority held that the respondent was eligible to take the credit. The order-in-original was reviewed in the department and an a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the respondent-company to appear before this Tribunal submits that the Revenue's appeal has only to be rejected in view of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court's decision in Commissioner Vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd. 2010 (260) E.L.T 369 (Bom.). Written submissions of the respondent are also seen on record and the same rely on case-law including the above decision of the Bombay High Court. 4. I have con .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... namely the worker, the manufacturer could not take credit of that part of the service tax which was borne by the consumer. On this basis, the respondent cannot claim CENVAT credit of that part of the service tax which was borne by their employees. According to the respondent, the cost of outdoor catering service was recovered only to the extent of 25% from their workers. In my view, the responden .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X