9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 437X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een filed by the appellant M/s. Sos Enterprise, Rajkot against the OIA No. 2402012/COMMR (A)/RBT/RAJ dated 09.05.12 under which the order in Original No. 39/JC/2011 dated 09.12.11 was upheld. The issue involved in this case is that on the basis of Audit the accounts of M/s. Sos Finance Ahmedabad it was observed that M/s. Sos Finance Ahmedabad took cenvat credit shown on the invoices whereas the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also argued that the benefit of cum duty has not been extended to them. Sh. G.P. Thomas, ld. AR on the other hand reiterated the stand taken by the adjudicating authority and the first appellate authority. 3. Heard both sides, it is observed from the order-in-appeal passed by the first appellate authority that he has held the verification done by the adjudicating authority to be correct and accor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvat credit taken. What was required to be seen by the adjudicating authority was to find out the correct consideration received by the service provider from the service recipient. Further the benefit of cum duty tax was also required to be extended to the appellant. As these verifications can be done by the first adjudicating authority the order-in-Appeal passed by the first appellate authority i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
