9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1442X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the ld.Advocate on limitation. The appellants contested the demand on merits also. It is seen that all these issues on merit were not examined by the lower authorities in proper manner. It is appropriate that the matter should be remanded to the Adjudicating Authority to decide afresh. Appeal allowed by way of remand. - S.T. Appeal No.76599/16 - Order No. F/O/77440/2017 - Dated:- 21-9-201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of equal amount of Cenvat Credit, which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). 3. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 4. I find that the Adjudicating Authority disallowed the Cenvat Credit of ₹ 18,78,646/- on GTA service, cargo courier service and club hotel membership service. The Adjudicating Authority observed that GTA and courier and cargo services were used fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lly, a show-cause notice dated 24.09.2009 was issued proposing to disallow Cenvat Credit of ₹ 16,83,077/- on cargo courier service and GTA service and also Club Membership service for the period 2006-07 and 2007-08. Subsequently, another show-cause notice dated 30.03.2010 was issued to deny the Cenvat Credit of service tax of ₹ 18,78,646/- for the period from 2004-05 to 2007-08 in re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he reason that the earlier show-cause notice dated 24.09.2009 was withdrawn by the Revenue and therefore, the said notice is non-est. Hence, there is no force in the submission of the ld.Advocate on limitation. 8. I find that the appellants contested the demand on merits also. It is contended that the appellant utilized 20% of the eligible input credit against courier and cargo charges. It is f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
