9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 1138X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in judicial decisions only upon incorporation in the consequent adjudication orders and the specifics mandated in such decisions cited in the adjudication order could not have been factually countered except at the appellate stage. Opportunity had not been afforded to the appellant for doing so in the earlier round that was carried to the Tribunal for dismissal at threshold. Doubtlessly, the appellant did not take advantage of the opportunity to present the applicability, or otherwise, of the decision in CCE VERSUS MANIKGARH CEMENT [ 2010 (10) TMI 10 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] and their claim of the impugned order having been passed before they could so is not credible defence as the timelines had not been adhered to by them. Nonetheless, se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of decision of the Hon ble High Court of Bombay in Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur v. Ultratech Cement Ltd [2010 (260) ELT 369 (Bom)] claimed by appellant to have settled the issue in dispute. 2. The issue is availment of credit of tax borne on consideration paid by appellant in procurement of telecom services in connection with telephones installed at homes of senior functionaries, air travel agent service for booking of airline tickets of senior officials, mandap keeper service for certain conventions and employee sessions, pandal/shamiana service for some functions and event management service that service tax authorities considered not to have nexus with their manufacturing activity in terms of input service defi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... absence of any submissions made by appellant. He submitted several decisions of the Tribunal that relied on the former for disallowing credit availed on services that had clearly not been used in manufacturing process. 5. The first appellate authority, after taking note of the direction of the Tribunal, had dismissed the appeals without examining the submissions made on the finding that .In the instant case, the original adjudicating authority discussed the above mentioned decision in the case of M/s Coca Cola India Pvt Ltd and observed that the appellant had not produced any evidence to prove that the credit of the disputed services formed part of the value of the final product. I find that the appellants are only placing relianc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the appellate stage. Opportunity had not been afforded to the appellant for doing so in the earlier round that was carried to the Tribunal for dismissal at threshold. Hence, the significance of the specific direction of the Tribunal in the order of remand which the impugned proceedings should have been adhered to and, instead of which, the first appellate authority has relied upon the perceived mandate of the decision in re Coca Cola India Pvt Ltd as scrutinized by the original authority. 7. Doubtlessly, the appellant did not take advantage of the opportunity to present the applicability, or otherwise, of the decision in re Manikgarh Cement and their claim of the impugned order having been passed before they could so is not credible d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
