2015 (8) TMI 1405

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s no allegation in the SCN regarding the nexus between the disputed service and the goods manufactured by the appellant. Hence, in absence of any specific allegation made therein, the Commissioner (Appeals), is forbidden under law to decide such issue. Thus, he has travelled beyond the scope of show cause notice, and as such, this ground taken for denial of Cenvat benefit is not in conformity with .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... id adjudication order, Revenue has filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeals), Gurgaon, which was disposed of vide the impugned order dated 21-8-2009 in favour of the Revenue. Hence the present appeal is before this Tribunal. 2. Shri R.S. Tandon, ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that service tax paid by the service receiver under Section 66A of Finance Act, 1994 read with Rul .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... xable service, in terms of Rule 2(1)(d)(iv) ibid read with Section 66A ibid. Since, Section 66A was not in existing in the statute book at the time of taking Cenvat credit; the lower authorities have rightly denied the Cenvat benefit. However, since clause (ixa) was inserted in Rule 3 of the Cenvat Rules w.e.f. 18-4-2006 by Section 71 of the Finance Act, 2011, which entitles a manufacturer to take .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X