TMI Blog2008 (12) TMI 170X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stay applications for waiver of pre-deposit of the service tax credit irregularly taken and demanded from them vide four impugned orders. Since the nature of the dispute in all the appeals is more or less same they are being decided by this common order. 2. The ld. Advocate appearing for the applicant raised the preliminary objection common to all appeal stating that all the cases involved availment and utilization of credit on input services and in such cases the demand should have been issued under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 instead of Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, as has been done in the present case. It is his submission that under Rule 514 (sic) (Rule 14) of the Cenvat Credit Rules both Section 11A and Section 73 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal decision in the case of CCE (LTU) Chennai v. Brakes India Ltd. reported in 2009 (13) S.T.R. 684 (Tri.-Chennai) = 2008 (89) RLT 876 (CESTAT-Che.) which in turn relied on several other decisions of the Tribunal to this effect. In respect of Rent-a-cab service, Association service and Security Service, it is his submission that they have to be considered as input service as per the inclusive definition of 'input service' as these services are meant for carrying on the business. He placed reliance on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-V v. GTC Industries Ltd., 2008 (12) S.T.R. 468 (Tri.-LB). 5. The ld. DR would submits that the demand has been rightly issued under Section 11A as th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for that purpose the provisions of Section 11A and Section 73 has been made applicable by Rule 14 which talks about both the manufacturer of the goods as well as provider of the output service. Section 11A prima facie will be applicable in respect of the manufacturer who utilize the credit for payment of excise duty and Section 73 will be applicable in respect of output service provider who utilize the credit for payment of service tax and, therefore, demand under Section 11A prima facie is maintainable. As regards invocation of extended period I find that CESTAT decision in the case of Gufic Pharma Pvt. Ltd. which has been followed in other decisions referred to the declaration which were required to be made before the Central Excise auth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Prima facie this does not appear to be admissible. 8. In view of above, I hold that the appellants have not been able to make out a prima facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit of duty/service tax demanded from them. I, therefore, direct pre-deposit of the following amount: Sr.No. Appeal No. Amount 1. ST/241/08 Rs.10,000/- 2. ST/242/08 Rs. 5,000/- 3. ST/243/08 Rs.10,000/- 4. ST/244/08 Rs. 25,000/- The above amount should be paid within 8 weeks from today and compliance reported on 4-3-2009. On such compliance there shall be waiver of the pre-deposit of the balance amount of and recovery thereof stayed till the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
