9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 429X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts of the case are that appellant is a manufacturer of various types of electric appliances and they are selling the same through their various branches and the condition of sale is that, during the warranty period, the appellant shall provide service of Repair and Maintenance free of cost for the agreed period. Revenue is of the view that free warranty service of Repair and Maintenance is an exempted service therefore, for the impugned period i.e. 2006-07 and 2007-08, Cenvat credit attributable to free service of Repair and Maintenance is sought to be denied to the appellant on various input services and inputs. Consequently, show cause notice was issued to the appellant which was adjudicated and converted into impugned order denying th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the adjudicating authority himself has allowed the Cenvat credit to them on the said activity and the said order has not been challenged by the Revenue and therefore, the Revenue cannot take two contrary views on the same issue in the case of same assessee. In that circumstance also the demand is not sustainable. He also submitted that in their own case, this Tribunal vide Final Order No. A/56363/2016 dated 23.12.2016 has allowed the Cenvat credit to the appellant therefore, the appellant is entitled to avail cenvat credit. 4. On the other hand, ld. AR reiterates the findings of the impugned order and submits that service of Repair and Maintenance during the period of warranty, free of cost is an exempted service as no money is recovered b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ove, whether the appellant is engaged in the activity of trading or not? - We find that the appellant is a branch office of their head office and they are getting the goods on stock transfer basis from head office for sale. Therefore, the appellant are selling their own goods, manufactured by them. If the person selling the goods manufactured them, in that circumstance, the appellant cannot be said that he is a trader. Therefore, we hold that the appellant is not engaged in the activity of trading. 6. In view of the above, we answer both the issues in favour of the appellant. As in the appellant s own case, this Tribunal vide order dated 23.12.2016 (supra) allowed the Cenvat credit on the said service and for the subsequent period, the adj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
