9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 689X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ommissioner (AR), for Respondent ORDER Per: Anil G. Shakkarwar The present appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. NOI-EXCUS-001-APP-1944-17-18 dated 27/03/2018 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Noida. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant were providing restaurant service. The appellant was paying service tax on 30% value as provided throu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4,06,292/- for the period from July, 2012 to March, 2013. The contention of the appellant was that if the Cenvat credit is allowed to them and amount already paid by them already taken into consideration before the issue of show cause notice, the entire liability was discharged. The Original Authority has taken into consideration the provisions of Sub-rule (7) of Rule 4 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Collector of Central Excise, Allahabad Vs M/s Ram Swarup Electricals Ltd. reported at 2007 (217) ELT 12 (All.). He has submitted that the Hon'ble High Court had ruled that such amendment for prescribing time limit of 6 months was with prospective effect and therefore, appellant is eligible to take Cenvat credit for the period from 01.07.2012 to 31.03.201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly applicable in the facts of the present case. Since during the period from 01.07.2012 to 31.03.2013 there was no such restriction to avail Cenvat credit within 6 months from the date of receipt of services, by following the ruling of Hon'ble High Court as stated above, I find that the appellant were eligible for Cenvat credit of Rs. 4,06,292/-. 6. I, therefore, set aside the impugned order and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
