TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 235X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mium on vehicles cannot be denied - these services are related to activity of business. - E/1504/2007-SM(BR) - 819/2011-SM(BR)(PB) - Dated:- 4-11-2011 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, J. REPRESENTED BY : Ms. R. Jagdav, SDR, for the Appellant. Ms. Neha Gulati, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order]. Revenue filed this appeal against Order of the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby Cenvat Credit on input services namely, Courier service, and premium of insurance in respect of car were allowed. I have heard learned SDR Smt. R. Jagdav appearing for the Revenue. Ms. Neha Gulati, learned Advocate appears for the Respondent. 2. Learned SDR on behalf of the Revenue submits that Courier services are not used directly or indirectly in the manu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Tri. - Bangl.) 4. After hearing both sides and on perusal of the records, I find that the original authority denied the credit on the input service on the ground that these services were not used in or in relation to the manufacture of final product. Commissioner (Appeals) observed that these services are used in the business activity. I find that the Tribunal in the above cases held that Cenvat credit on input services namely, Courier service and insurance premium on vehicles cannot be denied. It is held that these services are related to activity of business. In this context, finding of the Tribunal in the case of Millipore India Ltd. (supra) as under :- On a very careful consideration of the issue, I find that CAS-4 has considered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asked to forward all the 89 documents which are referred to in the Annexure to the show cause notice. As against this, the lower authority forwarded only 14 documents, of which then are those where the addresses mentioned in the telephone bills are of the appellants city office. In respect of two the addresses mentioned are that of their Mumbai office and in respect of other two, the addresses are of their factory. On the other hand, the appellants have produced all 89 documents and on scrutiny of these it is verified that in respect of all, the addresses are those of their factory, their office at Bhilai and their office at Mumbai. Therefore, it is not understood as to how the lower authority came to the conclusion that the documents are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
