TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 894X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clearly make the impugned credit admissible. In the grounds of appeal submitted by the Department they have merely stated that the impugned cabs were not exclusively used for the purpose of maintenance etc. but have not given any evidence to that effect. The Commissioner (Appeals) also observed that Revenue had not given any evidence contrary to the submissions of the appellants - no infirmity in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore, this appeal should be linked with that. Learned Advocate for the appellants submitted that the issue may not be identical and therefore this appeal should be decided. 3. Essentially the Revenues appeal is on the ground that the rented cabs were not exclusively used for the purpose of providing output service. 4. I have gone through the facts of the case. I find that in the order-in-appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urview of input service, it has to be established as to whether the said service was used for purposes other than that of company business. The appellant had clearly stated in their submission that these services were availed by them for carrying out the business providing output services. I find nothing contrary to the submissions given by the appellant from the Department side. Therefore, order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of input service needs to be interpreted liberally. 6. I find that in the present case, as discussed above Revenue has not produced any evidence to the effect that the observation in the impugned order-in-appeal are factually incorrect nor have they produced any evidence in support of the ground on which this appeal has been filed. 7. In view of the foregoing, I find no infirmity in the imp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
