New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (9) TMI 620 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

2015 (9) TMI 620 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD - TMI - Denial of CENVAT Credit - whether the Appellant is eligible to take CENVAT Credit on the ISD invoices issued by Head office situated in Mumbai - services of Professional Fees & Brokerage for sale of Land is not in relation to manufacturing activity and is not eligible for CENVAT Credit - Held that:- Bench in the case of Cadmac Machinery Co. (P) Ltd Vs CCE Ahmedabad (2011 (8) TMI 709 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD) has held that the services regarding valuation of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

also prior to 01.04.2011, therefore, it has to be held that the services availed in relation to Professional Fees & Brokerage for sale of Land belonging to Appellant are eligible to CENVAT Credit. This Bench has not gone into the jurisdictional issue and time barred aspect of the appeal as on merit, CENVAT Credit has been held to be admissible to the Appellant. - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. E/10669/2013-SM - ORDER NO. A/11097/2015 - Dated:- 23-7-2015 - H K Thakur, Member (T), J. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

as rejected the appeal filed by the Appellant on the ground that the services of Professional Fees & Brokerage for sale of Land availed by the Head Office of the Appellant and subsequently distributed to the Appellant s factory under Rule 4A of Service Tax Rules, 1994 does not qualify to be input services under Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004. 2. Shri Vinay Kansara (Advocate) appearing on behalf of the Appellant argued that CENVAT Credit was taken by the Appellant on the strength of va .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ll the details as prescribed by the Rules. He relied upon the case law of CCE Vs Godfrey Philips India Ltd [2009 (14) STR 375 ((Tri-Ahmd). It was his case that the Appellant s Headquarter is filing returns under Rule 9(10) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 on half yearly basis and that there head office has also been audited periodically by the officers Central Excise. 2.1 That on merits, it is the case of the Appellant that certain services were availed by the Headquarters of the Appellant with respe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

by the learned Advocate of the Appellant that the period involved in the present appeal is March 2008, which is before the date of amendment of Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004. He relied upon the case law of this Bench in the case of Cadmac Machinery Co. (P) Ltd Vs CCE Ahmedabad [2013 (31) STR (Tri-Ahmd)], where an activity in relation to valuation of property was considered to be an activity in relation to business and eligible for CENVAT Credit under Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules 200 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version