TMI Blog2013 (2) TMI 301X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee has only one factory – Held that:- There is only one factory and therefore the question of distribution does not arise – As decided in Modern Petrofils if the service was received by the factory, credit is admissible even if the document is in the name of registered office – Decided in favour of the assessee. - ST/372/2011 - A/1657/2011-WZB/AHD - Dated:- 27-9-2011 - Shri B.S.V. Murthy, J ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l decision. 3. The learned counsel on behalf of the appellant submitted that the appellant has only one factory and therefore the question of distribution does not arise. He also submitted that it is not the case of the department, that service has not been received. He relies upon the decisions of the Tribunal in the case of C.C.E., Vapi v. DNH Spinners reported in 2009 (244) E.L.T. 65 (Tri. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... UOI reported in 2006 (195) E.L.T. 267 (Guj.). The learned SDR with the support of above decisions sought to submit that according to these decisions, registration of input service distributor is a must and if the input service distributor is not registered credit is not admissible. 4. After considering the submissions and records I find that the decisions relied upon by the learned SDR are not a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at all when they have only one factory and when the credit has been taken by the factory on the basis of invoices issued by service providers. There is also no indication or no allegation in the show cause notices or in the findings that appellant s factory did not receive the service. In the decisions cited by the learned counsel, a view was taken that credit cannot be denied and the invoice is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
