9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 1028X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at credit is admissible - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/850/10 - A/88163/17/SMB - Dated:- 26-5-2017 - Shri Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial) Shri Rajesh Ostwal, Advocate for Appellant Shri Ajay Kumar, Addl. Commr., (A.R) for respondent ORDER The fact of the case is that the appellant is a 100% EOU. They claim Cenvat Credit in respect of various input and inputs services in respect of which they have filed a refund claim under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The adjudicating authority denied the refund on the ground that the input services on which the credit was taken are not admissible input services. The Commissioner (Appeals) also upheld the same finding of the original authority. Being a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore as per the formula prescribed under Notification No.5/2006-CE., the total refund to be allowed is total cenvat credit availed during the said quarter therefore even the allegation made in the show cause notice is also not sustainable. As regard the admissibility of the input service he submits that there is no allegation in the show cause notice without putting the appellant to notice regarding any issue which is not before the show cause notice cannot be dealt by the lower authorities. For the same reason it is not open for the Commissioner (Appeals) also to give any finding in relation to the allegation which was not made in the show cause notice. Alternately he submits that even if the issue of admissibility of the Cenvat Credit is c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. As regard the credit availed on the inputs the appellant have not established the Co-relation between the input used and goods exported. Therefore once the input itself is not admissible and no co-relation was established, refund under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 cannot be granted. 4. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. I find that the appellant being a 100% EOU and on the undisputed fact that during the relevant quarter i.e. January 2007 to March 2007 entire manufactured goods have been exported, there is no need of any co-relation to be established. The co-relation is required only when the part manufactured goods is exported and part is cleared in the domestic market. In case of EOU where ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sue of admissibility of input service was raised in the show cause notice. It was not open for both the authority to deal with the said issue, therefore on this ground the rejection of claim is illegal and incorrect. Even, on the admissibility of the input service in respect of the service in question. This Tribunal have decided that almost all the services are admissible service as given below: Input Service Judgment by which credit on such input service is allowed Interior Decorator service Carrier Airconditioning Refrigeration Ltd. Vs. CCE 2016 (41) STR 824 (Tri. - Chan.) Courier Service Ucal Fuel Systems Ltd. V ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
