9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 344X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 11. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, during the period under consideration, the assessee-Appellants were registered with the Central Excise & Service Tax Department as Input Service Distributors (ISD). They were availing the facility of Cenvat Credit of Service Tax paid on various input services including Advertisement Service & Sales Promotion Service. As input service distributors, they used to distribute input service credit to its various units which were manufacturing dutiable goods. The dispute in the present appeals is pertaining to the credit of Service Tax paid on (i) advertisement and sales promotion services; and (ii) Rule 6(5) services, such as, management consultancy, security, maintenance or repair etc. received at th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tax paid was not admissible to be distributed which was exclusively used in unit engaged in the manufacture of exempted goods. The said Show Cause Notice nowhere established that the Cenvat credit which was proposed to be recovered was used in a unit exclusively engaged in manufacture of exempted goods. It is admitted that the Services such as Advertisement Service & Sales Promotion Services, were utilized in Corporate Office, Kaushambi, Ghaziabad. The ld. Counsel also contended that both the Show Cause Notices are hit by limitation. He has also contended that the second Show Cause Notice is repetition of the first Show Cause Notice. We keep the issue of limitation open. We set aside both impugned Order-in-Original and allow both appeals. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tribution of credit in respect of services which are exclusively used in relation to manufacturing of exempted goods. 9. It may be mentioned that Rule 7 of Cenvat Credit Rules, was amended vide Notification No.5/2014-CE(NT) dated 24.02.2014 whereby the expression was substituted with "used by one or more units" in the place of "used in a unit". Further, such an amendment will have no bearing in the present proceedings which cover the period prior to Jan 2010. The submissions of the appellant is supported by the decision of Tribunal in the case of Elder Pharmaceuticals Limited (supra)." By following our earlier decisions (supra), we find no reason to sustain the impugned orders and the same are hereby set aside. 5. In the result, the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
