9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 971X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion No. 2/2016-CX (N.T.) should be declaratory in nature and effective retrospectively. Commissioner(Appeals) has committed no error while allowing the assesees’ Appeal - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules. As has been held by Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case C.C.E. Vs. Ambika Overseas 2012 (278) E.L.T. 524 since both the decisions have created confusion with explanation to Rule 2(l) got inserted vide Notification No. 02/2016 dated 03.02.2016 allowing the cenvat credit on sales commission agent services it is impressed upon that the same is retrospective in nature as was held by the Tribunal Ahmedabad in the decision of Essar Steel India Ltd. Vs. C.C.E. & S.T., Surat 2016(335) E.L.T. 660 wherein the decision of Ambika Overseas (supra) was followed. It is impressed upon that Commissioner(Appeals) has rightly appreciated the above facts as such the Order is liable to be sustained. 4. After hearin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion that the activities in respect of which cenvat had been filed were pre-removal activities and the same could not be held to be post removal. It was further observed that canvassing central excise appeal No. 43 of 2011 and procuring orders were in relation to 'sales promotion' and would fall under sales promotion activities. These activities were thus included in the definition of input services and the assessee was entitled to benefit of cenvat credit of service tax. It would be advantageous to notice here the findings recorded by the Tribunal in para 6 of its order which are to the following effect: I have carefully considered the submissions from both sides. The canvassing and procuring orders are activities preceding removal of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctive effect. Further, the issues is no more res integra. It has been decided by this Tribunal itself vide Final Order No. 57044 of 2017 dated 09.10.2017 wherein the previous decision bearing Final Order No. 56683-85 dated 28.07.2017 was held upon wherein was examined the issue alongwith he decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court and Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court. Vide another Final Order No. A/71064-71073/2017 dated 05.09.2017 the Tribunal came to the conclusion that assessee is entitled to avail cenvat credit on commission paid to agent who has effected the sale on behalf of the assessee. It was held therein that in view of the two contradictory decisions, the legislature took a call for explaining the meaning of sales promotion by i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
