TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 384X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hese expenses are re-imbursed by the appellant to M/s. American Express (I) Pvt. Ltd. does not make them eligible to CENVAT credit in respect of these services. The original authority has denied the credit on these invoices as the nature of the services are not clear. The invoices in question referred to the words ‘Real Estate Agents’ along with their service tax registration number. The Commissioner (Appeals) after going through the service agreement came to the conclusion that the service agreement nowhere mentions the ‘Real Estate Agents’ service, whereas the invoices in question referred to ‘Real Estate Agents’ service. These invoices cannot be connected to the service agreement. In the absence of which, the Commissioner (Appeals) ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und amount. Present appeal is filed by the appellant against the impugned order. 2. Heard both the sides. 3. The Commissioner (Appeals) in respect of Invoice No.31 has denied the credit amounting to Rs.3,605/- on the ground that this invoice is for the purchase of monitor and therefore irrespective of the fact that whether this monitor was under warranty or not, the credit is not admissible to the appellant as this was for purchase of equipment and not for services received. Therefore, the credit of tax in respect of this invoice has rightly been disallowed by the Commissioner (Appeals) as this was in respect of purchasing an equipment and does not pertain to the services provided. I do not find any infirmity in this finding of the Comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal in the cases of C.C.E., Trichy Vs. Grasim Inds. reported in 2011 -TIOL 172- CESTAT- MAD and in the case of Hindustan Zinc Vs. C.C.E., Jaipur-II reported in 2011 (270) E.L.T. (Tri.-Del.) and the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Mumbai in the case of Manikgarh Cement Vs. C.C.E., reported in 2010 (20) S.T.R. 456 (Bom. HC). In view of the decisions of the Tribunal and Hon'ble High Court of Mumbai, there is no reason to find fault in the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) in denying the credit in respect of security services. 6. Another issue of denial of CENVAT credit is on invoices under Facilities Management services issued by M/s. C.B. Richards Ellis. The original authority has denied the credit on these invoices as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
