TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 1115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r No.52238/2016 - Dated:- 27-6-2016 - Shri B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical) Rep. by Ms. Sukriti Das, Advocate for the appellant. Rep. by S. Nanthuk, AR for the respondent. ORDER The appeal is against order dated 13.01.2016 of Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Jaipur. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of casting of Iron and Steel liable to central excise duty. The manufacturing unit is located in Bhiwadi, Rajasthan. The employees of the appellant s unit availed guest room facilities available at the Guest House managed by Head Office at Gurgaon. For the said services, the appellant paid consideration alongwith service tax and availed the credit of such tax under the provisions of Cenvat Credi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en is taxable only w.e.f. 1.5.2011 under the category of short term accommodation . Any credit prior to that period is not admissible as the amount paid is not relatable to service tax legally payable. Regarding eligibility of the credit, ld. AR submitted that the employees staying in Gurgaon Guest House on charges has no nexus to the manufacturing activity of the appellant s unit at Bhiwadi. Further, he also stated that the nature of tour and stay has not been elaborated with evidence. Hence, the credit was rightly disallowed to the appellant. 4. Heard both the sides and examined the appeal records. 5. The only point for decision is availability of service tax credit for the appellant on the charges paid by them for accommodation o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and selling of excisable goods. I find no material to support the plea that accommodation is for regular residential stay by the employees. The appellants have categorically asserted that their staff and executives associated with Bhiwadi Unit availed the room facilities at Gurgaon. These accommodation facilities are for official stay billed and paid by the appellant and forming part of their business expenditure. These are not for personal use of employees. Considering the above factual position, I find that the objection of the Revenue, on the second ground also is untenable. 6. In view of the above discussion and analysis, the impugned order is set aside. The appeal is allowed. [Order dictated pronounced in open court] - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
