2020 (10) TMI 909

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation (DICGC) - HELD THAT:- The issue with regard to availment of cenvat credit on the disputed service was highly debatable and there were conflicting views by different benches of the Tribunal. For resolving the dispute, the Larger Bench was constituted. In the case of South Indian Bank Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise Service Tax, Calicu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... peal against the impugned order dated 29.06.2016 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Service Tax-I, Mumbai, wherein service tax demand of ₹ 2,06,91,311/- was confirmed along with interest and ₹ 20,69,131/- was imposed as penalty. Revenue has assailed the impugned order dated 27.06.2018 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals-I), Mumbai, whereby the adjudged demands confirm .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n Deposit Insurance Service provided by DICGC, considering the same as input service, defined under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Availment of Cenvat Credit was disputed by the department inter alia, on the ground that such services have no nexus or connectivity with the actual performance of the banking service provided by the assessee-appellant. 4. We find that the issue with regar .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X