9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 389X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Jindal : The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein inputs service credit attributable to taxable as well as exempted services has been denied to the appellant. 2. Brief facts of the case are that appellant is a output service provider as well as engaged in the activity of trading during the period April, 2005 to March, 2010. Audit took place in the premises of appellant and a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d as per explanation trading activity was treated as exempted services. As prior to 1.4.2011, the trading activity was not exempted service, therefore, appellant was under bonafide belief that they are entitled to take Cenvat credit in full, therefore they have taken the credit of Rs. 4,10,320/-. He further submits that if at all Cenvat credit is to be denied that is to be denied in pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the tune of Rs. 4,10,320/-. If at all there is any calculation mistake, the matter may be remanded back to the adjudicating authority. 5. Heard the parties. Considered the submissions. 6. On merits, there is no dispute between parties as both are relying on the decision of Orion Appliances Ltd. (supra). Therefore I hold that appellant is not entitled to take Cenvat credit of the common service ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity to be denied and if calculation is done to annexure B above, the amount works to Rs. 17,718/-. Therefore, I hold that appellant is not entitled to take Cenvat credit to the tune of Rs. 17,718/- attributable to trading activity. Further, I find that the appellant were under bonafide belief that prior to 1.4.2011, trading activity was not an exempted services. Therefore, penalty on the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
