2017 (3) TMI 619

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... es of the appellant. Therefore, the said services would not fall within the exclusion portion of the definition of input services - rejection of refund unjustified - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ST/25111 & 25112/2013, ST/27369/2013 & ST/20556/2014 - A/30138-30140/2017, A/30148/2017 - Dated:- 8-2-2017 - Ms. Sulekha Beevi, C.S., Member (Judicial) Shri. Rahul Binani, Shri. Prakash Consultants for the Appellant. Shri. Nagraj Naik, Deputy commissioner (AR) for the Respondent. [Order per: Sulekha Beevi, C.S.,] The above appeals are filed against the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) who partially rejected the refund claim. 2. On behalf of the appellant, the Ld. Consultant submitted that the app .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mmunication service 151 ,362 Telecommunication services 160,378 Chartered Accountant Service 43,894 1,030 Chartered Accountant service 17,734 Chartered Accountant Service 14,832 Security Agency Services 15,318 41,319 Management or business consultant service 31,621 Security Agency Services 67,9191 Management or business consultant service 27,557 48,075 Works Contract Service 3,172 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... - Customs House Agents service 3,729 Business Auxiliary service 14,461 Cleaning services 6,384 11,792 Erection Commissioning or Installation services 536 Banking or other Financial services 27,013 Technical Testing and Analysis services - 18,025 Technical Inspection and Certification services - 7,831 Total .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that credit is o eligible on the said services. In respect of Work Contract Services, on perusal of the invoices, it is seen that the said services are received by the appellant for minor works like fixing gypsum partition cladding, fixing of glass windows, fixing of wooden door, tower bolt etc. Therefore, I am of the view that these are minor Civil works received by the appellant for the purpose of renovation/repair and maintenance of the premises of the appellant. Therefore, the said services would not fall within the exclusion portion of the definition of input services. 6. From the foregoing discussions, and following the judgments of the Tribunal in the above stated Final Orders, I hold that the rejection of refund claim is unjustif .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X