9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 281X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e period involved in the present case is from February 2014 to March 2015 and therefore, the amended definition of input service (w.e.f. 01.04.2011) is applicable. The Outdoor Catering service being availed by the Appellant has a direct impact on the manufacturing process and the cost of the final product manufactured by the Appellant. In the event, the Appellant does not avail the said service, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ired to be carried out for the process of manufacture and delivery. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - MR. P. K. CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) NONE for the Appellant Shri Anil Choudhary, DC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of automobile parts falling under chapters 73 and 84 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Pursuant to an audit conduc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Appellant filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) against the said order, which was rejected vide Order-in-Appeal dated 18.09.2018. Hence, the present appeal before this Tribunal. 3. Heard the learned Authorized Representative for the Revenue and perused the appeal records. 4. On behalf of the Appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and therefore, the amended definition of input service (w.e.f. 01.04.2011) is applicable. 6. I find that the Outdoor Catering service being availed by the Appellant has a direct impact on the manufacturing process and the cost of the final product manufactured by the Appellant. In the event, the Appellant does not avail the said service, the employees in the Appellant-company would be compelled t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facture and delivery. The appeal filed by the Revenue before the Hon ble Supreme Court against the said judgment has been dismissed by the Hon ble Supreme Court vide order dated 06th August 2018. I find that the aforesaid judgment of the Hon ble Rajasthan High Court was not placed before the Larger Bench of this Tribunal for consideration in the case of Wipro Ltd. (supra). 8. Therefore, in light o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
