TMI Blog2010 (12) TMI 84X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lify to be input service under Rule 2 (l) of the CENVAT credit Rules, 2004 - Held that: - it was never the case of the Revenue that the food supplied by outdoor caterers to the respondent’s canteen was not supplied free to their workers. The show-cause notice did not allege that the goods was supplied to their workers at subsidized price or that the entire cost of the goods was recovered from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atter took CENVAT credit thereof. The show-cause notice in this case merely proposed to deny the credit to the party on the ground that the above service did not qualify to be input service under Rule 2 (l) of the CENVAT credit Rules, 2004. The noticee contested the proposal. The adjudicating authority held that the service was not an input service for want of any nexus with the manufacture and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ased on what is contained in para 39 of the Honrable High Courts judgement. On the other hand, the submission of the learned Consultant for the respondent is that there is no question of any remand of the case inasmuch as it was never the case of the Revenue that the food supplied to the respondent by outdoor caterers was not supplied free to their workers. The learned Consultant has virtually re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he use of outdoor catering service was integrally connected with the business of manufacturing the final products and therefore credit of the service tax paid on such service would be admissible to the manufacturer. In the present case, according to the Revenue, there was no connection between the outdoor catering service availed by the respondent and their business of manufacturing the final pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
