2018 (4) TMI 1642

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The services impugned in this appeal were availed by the respondent for providing output services and therefore qualifies as input service. Similar view expressed in the case of THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE CHENNAI II COMMISSIONERATE VERSUS M/S. BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD., THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX [2015 (3) TMI 1043 - MADRAS HIGH COURT], where it was held that credit is allowe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e are not eligible for credit. He submitted that the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in allowing the credit on these services. 3. The ld. counsel Ms. Radhika Chandrasekar appearing on behalf of the respondent submitted that the period involved is from February 2005 to March 2008 and during the relevant period, the definition of input services had a wide ambit as it includes the words activities r .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rrated above were availed by the respondent for providing output services and therefore qualifies as input service. On going through the records, we are convinced that the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly allowed the credit on these services. Similar view has been discussed by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Britannia Industries Ltd. and others 2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X