2016 (7) TMI 1706

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he Respondent : Sh. Vijay Gupta, AR. ORDER PER: ASHOK JINDAL The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order denying the cenvat credit of Rs. 25,82,82,437/- availed by the appellant along with interest and imposing penalty. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant was raised bills and collecting payments regarding Inter Usage Connection Charges (IUC) which is Secondary Swit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t submits that the issue is clearly covered by the decision of the Chennai bench of this Tribunal in appeal's own case reported in 2012 (28) STR 624 (Tri. Chennai) and Manipal Advertising Services Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2010 (19) STR 506 (Tri.-Bang), therefore, the impugned order be set aside. 4. On the other hand, the Ld. AR reiterated the finding in the impugned order. 5. Heard the parties .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as may be necessary. The argument of the appellants that the premises where the equipments are used belong to BSNL and not to any other party and it is also use' for completion of services originating from Salem also are strong arguments in favour of the appellants. Since Modvat credit is a substantial benefit, we are of the view that the impugned credit should not be denied on account of pro .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X