9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 695X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /2017 - Dated:- 12-5-2017 - Shri S. S. Garg, Judicial Member Mr. S. R. Madhava Murthy, Consultant For the Appellant Mr. Mohd. Yousaf (AR) For the Respondent ORDER Per: S. S. Garg The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 29.7.2011 passed by the Commissioner (A) wherein the Commissioner (A) has upheld the Order-in-Original and dismissed the appeal of the appellant. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that appellants are engaged in the manufacture of polystyrene products falling under Chapter Sub Heading No.3923 1090 3921 1090 of the First Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and are also availing benefit of CENVAT credit in terms of Rule 3 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. U ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry to the decisions rendered by the Tribunal in this regard. He further submitted that the definition of input service as defined under Rule 2(l) of the CCR, 2004 has been given wide interpretation by various courts including the Bombay High Court in the case of Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE reported in 2009 (15) STR 657. He further submitted that the service tax in question has been paid on air ticket booking agency for purchase of air tickets for travel of Senior Executives of the appellant company in connection with the business of manufacture and marketing of final product manufactured by the appellant and such expenses are borne by the company and it has a nexus with the activities related to business. In support of his submiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it party at the time of audit because they were lying in the corporate office and the appellant was in the process of shifting their manufacturing facility and the corporate office was also busy. He further submitted that the Commissioner has denied the CENVAT credit only on the ground that documents have not been produced. The learned counsel further submitted that the appellants are in the possession of documents now and they can produce the same before the original authority if the matter is remanded back to the original authority. 5. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material, I find that the appellant is entitled to the CENVAT credit on ₹ 87/- on air ticket which fall in the definition of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
