9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 968X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d and utilized for their business activity at their head office. I do not find any reason for not accepting the argument of ld. C.A. for the appellants that these services are necessary and having nexus with the manufacturing activity, therefore, credit availed is definitely admissible to them at their factory - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of the assessee. - Service Tax Appeal No.10096 of 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otice was issued for recovery of the said credit along with interest and proposal for penalty. On adjudication, the demand was confirmed with interest and equal amount of penalty imposed. On appeal, the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) in turn, upheld the Order and rejected their appeal. Hence, the present Appeal. 3. Ld. C.A. Shri H. Veyapari assisted by Shri Sunil C. Veyapari, C.A. submits that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was not registered as input service distributor. Further, he also submits that the issue is covered by the decision of the Hon ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Dashion Limited reported - 2016 (41) STR 884 (Guj.). 4. Ld. A.R. for Revenue reiterates the findings of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals). 5. I find that the only issue needs to be addresse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egistration of the unit as input service distributor. It is true that the Government had framed Rules of 2005 for registration of input service distributors, who would have to make application to the jurisdictional Superintendent of Central Excise in terms of Rule 3 thereof. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 3 further required any provider of taxable service whose aggregate value of taxable service exceeds cer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
