Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2020 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (1) TMI 367 - CESTAT AHMEDABADCENVAT credit - input services - labour service - denial on the ground that the service provider is registered for service namely, private security agency service - denial also on the ground of nexus - HELD THAT:- As regard the reason for denial of credit that the service provider is registered under private security agency service and the invoice for the service was raised under the head of labour service, there is no dispute that whatever service was mentioned in the invoice was received by the appellant and the same was used in their manufacture, with these facts credit cannot be denied. As regard the classification it is the subject matter of the service provider. The classification cannot be disputed in the hands of the recipient of the service as has been held in the case of M/S. NEWLIGHT HOTELS & RESORTS LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE & ST., VADODARA [2014 (11) TMI 209 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD], therefore, for this reason the cenvat credit cannot be denied. Scope of SCN - discrepancies pointed out in the service invoice issued by the service provider as regard incorrect address - HELD THAT:- Firstly there is no charge in the Show Cause Notice regarding the said discrepancy, therefore, the adjudicating authority cannot go beyond the scope of Show Cause Notice as the appellant was never put to notice about the new issue raised in the adjudication order. Secondly, it was not disputed by the department that the service was received by the appellant and used in the manufacture however, even if, there is any error in mentioning the address so long the service is received by the appellant, credit cannot be denied. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|