9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 144X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssioner (Appeals) has not followed the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Cadila Healthcare - 2013 (30) STR 3 (Guj). Ld. AR argued that the observation of the Commissioner (Appeals) that the decision of the Hon'ble High Court in the case of Ultratech Cement Ltd. would prevail over the judgement in M/s. Cadila Healthcare is not legal and proper, as the decision in the case of M/s.Cadila Healthcare is precisely on the issue of sales commission. 2.1 The second issue relates to the Cenvat Credit taken on the basis of invoice raised by M/s.Laxmi Trading Company, allegedly without receipt of goods. Ld. AR argued that in respect of goods received from Laxmi Trading Co. there no weighment slips for the goods and in all ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion - 2014 (35) STR 977 (Tri-Del) has come to the following conclusion: 8. Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was amended w.e.f. 1-4-2011 and by this amendment, the expression "activities related to business" in the inclusive portion of the definition of 'input service' was excluded. However, the expression "advertisement or sales promotion" was retained. The Board vide Circular No.943/4/2011-CX., dated 29-4-2011 (S. No.5 of the Table) in respect of the question "Is the credit of Business Auxiliary Service (BAS) on account of sales commission now disallowed after the deletion of expression "activities related to business", clarified as under "The definition of input service allows all credit on services used for clearance of final prod ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the goods were received and used for the intended purpose, is the person availing the credit. They are also required to maintain detailed records for the said purpose. The impugned order wrongly puts the onus on the Revenue and therefore, reaches a conclusion that credit is admissible. A show-cause notice was issued asking the appellant to produce evidence that the goods were received and therefore, the appellants have to discharge the burden of receipt of goods and it is not on revenue to establish that the goods were not received. 6. In view of the above, in the impugned order so far as it relates to non-receipt of goods is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh decision. The appeals are partly a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
