2019 (4) TMI 988

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt Shri P. Juneja, DR - for the respondent ORDER Per Ms. Archana Wadhwa: After hearing both the sides, I find that the appellants have been denied Cenvat credit of service tax to the extent of Rs. 28,11,939/- paid in respect of garden maintenance services for the period December, 2013 to March, 2016 on the ground that the said services are not covered with the definition of input services .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ce was issued on 27.10.2016. The said credit was being availed by the appellant by reflecting the same in the ER-1 returns and as also by maintaining proper records. In such a scenario, no mala fide can be attributed to them so as to justifiably invoked the longer period. Accordingly, the major part of demand is also held as barred by limitation. 4. In view of above, I set aside the impugned orde .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X