TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 384X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DGEMENT Per Hon'ble Mr. Sahab Singh : This appeal has been filed by M/s. EXL Services.com (India) Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as appellant) against the Order-in-Appeal No.28/Appl/LTU-2013, dated 30.03.2013. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant filed a refund claim on 30.06.2011 for Rs.30,69,909/- under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Notification No.5/2006 (EX(N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant as this was for purchase of equipment and not for services received. Therefore, the credit of tax in respect of this invoice has rightly been disallowed by the Commissioner (Appeals) as this was in respect of purchasing an equipment and does not pertain to the services provided. I do not find any infirmity in this finding of the Commissioner (Appeals). 4. The major part of the CENV ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Express (I) Pvt. Ltd. and not by the appellant. The fact that these expenses are re-imbursed by the appellant to M/s. American Express (I) Pvt. Ltd. does not make them eligible to CENVAT credit in respect of these services. Accordingly, I uphold this finding of Commissioner (Appeals) also. 5. The CENVAT credit of security services provided at the Guest House of the appellant located at places ot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Another issue of denial of CENVAT credit is on invoices under 'Facilities Management' services issued by M/s. C.B. Richards Ellis. The original authority has denied the credit on these invoices as the nature of the services are not clear. The invoices in question referred to the words 'Real Estate Agents' along with their service tax registration number. The Commissioner (Appeals) after going thro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds from the guest house or guard hut from one premises to another was in any way related to rendering of the output services. Accordingly, I find no infirmity in the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) in denying the CENVAT credit to the appellant.
8. In view of the above, I find no merit in the appeal filed by the appellant and accordingly, reject the same.
(Pronounced on 03.12.2013) X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|