9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 746X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the Respondent. ORDER The appellant entered into Tripartite consortium agreement and applied for the International tender invited by M/s. Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited (RINL) for design, manufacture, supply, erection, testing and commissioning of Blast Furnace. The total project value was Rs. 920 crores and the appellant's portion of the project was Rs. 808.2 crores. The appellant along with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the provider of service did not have an office in India and the liability fall on the appellant. Payments were made in July, 2008 and August, 2008. 2. The show cause notice dated 3-10-2011, proposal to deny Cenvat credit of Rs. 2,22,31,277/- availed by the appellant on the ground that credit of Service Tax on leadership fee to the extent to value of supply of goods is not eligible as credit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. We do not consider it is necessary going in to all these arguments. Rules 6(1), (2), (3) and 3(a) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (CCR) are relevant. Provisions which provide as well as exempted goods or a service provider is providing taxable and exempted services, he is required to maintain separate accounts in respect of inputs and input services and follow the provisions of Rule 3(a) of C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o independent contract for supply of goods and services. Therefore, one of the grounds taken is that if the supply of goods is involved, credit proportionate to that extent is not admissible. However, Rule 6(5) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 does not distinguish between the activities undertaken as part of composite contract or independent contracts. So long as an assessee is not undertaking manufac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
