9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1132X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of remand. - E/21781/2017-SM - 20406/2018 - Dated:- 20-3-2018 - MR. S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Mr. Pradyumna G.H. Advocate For the Appellant Dr. J. Harish, Deputy Commissioner For the Respondent per : SS GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 24.10.2017 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeal of the appellant. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods i.e. Hydraulic Cylinders, Hydraulic Systems falling under Chapter Subheading 84 of the first schedule of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and are availing cenvat credit on input and input services as per the pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ob work for the appellant and hence the cenvat credit availed during the period was irregular and liable to be demanded along with interest. The learned counsel submitted that this conclusion arrived at by the original authority is totally unsustainable and the demand is liable to be set aside, Thereafter he referred to the definition of 'input service' as amended from 01.04.2011 which defines 'input service' means any service used by a manufacturer, whether directly or indirectly in or in relation to the manufacture of final product and clearance of final products up to the place of removal and also includes other services as specifically defined in the said Rule, He further submitted that the premises located at No, 104 an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssioner of Service Tax, Bangalore [2017 (62) S.T.R. 385 (Tri. -Bang.)] He further submitted that as regards the demand of cenvat credit for ₹ 2,63,942/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Sixty Three Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty Two only) for the period from April 2007 to September 2010 and the said amount was paid as per the insistence of the Central Excise Audit and after remitting the said service tax along with interest, the service provider who incidentally is a Director of the appellant-company raised invoice in the name of the appellant's unit charging the service tax. On receipt of the invoice appellant paid the service tax amount to the service provider and availed cenvat credit in respect of the premises located at Unit II. Appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... firm the demand for the period 2015-16 as well. 5. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that appellant has failed to produce the documents before him justifying the claim of cenvat credit and other material facts which are. disputed. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he has got all the records and the documents to produce before the adjudicating authority if the matter is remanded back to the original authority to examine the claim of the appellant afresh. The learned AR has no objection to the said argument. In view of this, I am of the view that the present case needs to be remanded back to the original authority wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
