9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 1114X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s were not used for export of services. Coming to such conclusion, show-cause notices were issued to the appellant for the period April 2006 to September 2010, two show-cause notices got adjudicated and the demands were confirmed with interest and penalties were imposed. Aggrieved by such an order, the appellant preferred an appeal before this Tribunal and this Bench vide Final Order No. A/1423-1431/13/CSTB/C-I dated 20-06-2013 set aside the impugned orders and remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority with specific directions. Subsequently, new show-cause notices were issued for the period October 2010 to September 2012 for demanding ineligible CENVAT Credit availed by the appellant. All the show-cause notices for the period April 2006 to September 2012 are adjudicated by the impugned order and demands are confirmed with interest and penalties. 3. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant would submit that the demands are contested by the appellant on two grounds. Firstly on calculation errors and secondly legal submission on eligibility of disputed input service. 3.1 Learned Counsel would submit that CENVAT Credit availed on the following servies as in d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an order that allowed credit, the adjudicating authority could not have confirmed the said demands of approximately Rs. 5.02 crores. He would draw our attention to various documents in respect of this submission. It is his further submission that the confirmation of the demands approximately Rs. 1.64 crores is also incorrect as the said amount has been wrongly taken by the adjudicating authority. He would submit that the demand actually is for approximately Rs. 2.23 lakhs while the adjudicating authority has confirmed the demand which is in respect of the CENVAT Credit availed on various other allowable eligible services. 3.3 As regards the submission on the eligibility to avail CENVAT Credit on various input services it is his submission that the adjudicating authority had disputed the CENVAT Credit availed of the service tax paid on transport of passengers by air services, Event Management, Mandap Keeper services, accommodation/guest house services, Scientific & Technical Consultancy services and various other services only on the ground that the appellant had not used these services for providing output services. He would draw our attention to various documents wherein service ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T Credit of the service tax paid on various input services. It is his submission that it is for the appellant-assessee to justify the eligibility to avail CENVAT Credit. He would then draw our attention to the CENVAT Credit Rules and submit that the appellant being from an organized Sector should have first ascertained the eligibility to avail the CENVAT Credit on the service tax paid by various service providers. 5. We have considered the submissions made at length by both the sides and perused the records. 6. Undisputed facts are that the appellant herein availed CENVAT Credit of service tax paid on various input services as indicated in para 3.1. It is also undisputed that the documents on which CENVAT Credit availed are correct and not challenged by the Revenue. 6.1 In the above factual matrix, the findings of the adjudicating authority for denying CENVAT Credit on various input services as indicated here-in above seems to be that the appellant had not substantiated their eligibility to avail CENVAT Credit, and there has to be some nexus with the output service provided by them with reasonable evidences, that the Health and Fitness Service are the services in respect of indi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n we perused the request raised, we find that the request specifically indicates that the employees is undertaking such tour for official business of the appellant. On the face of such uncontroverted documentary evidence, we find that the service tax paid by various service providers under the category of transport of passenger by air lines, credit cannot be denied. 7.2 As regards the CENVAT Credit of the service tax paid on Event Management/Mandap Keeper services, on perusal of random examples which has been shown to us and which was produced before the adjudicating authority, we find that the service provider has specifically indicated on the invoice which was raised that, the said bill is raised for the client's interactions and various training programmes of the appellant. The use of "Mandap Keeper Services" or the "Event Management Service" in respect of the services are used by the appellant at various hotels are structured and executed by Event Management Co and is in respect of the business activity of the appellant. We find that the appellant has justified the CENVAT Credit availed on the service tax paid by the service provider on these servies. 7.3 Mere perusal of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
