2016 (8) TMI 482

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ORDER Per R. K. Singh Appeals have been filed against Order-in-Appeal dated 02.03.2015.The issue involved in these appeals is whether CENVAT credit is permissible under 'Rent-a-Cab' service for engaging cabs for carrying staff from residence to the factory and back. While the primary adjudicating authority allowed the credit, the Commissioner (Appeals) disallowed the same on the ground .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Ltd. Vs. CCE [2015 (37) STR 508 (Tri.-Ahmd.)]. She also asserted that the recovery of Rs. 110/- p.m. and Rs. 150/- p.m. from the employee represented only a token amount towards for the cost of transport and that the entire service tax was paid by the appellant and no part of the impugned service tax was recovered from the employees. 3. Ld. Departmental Representative, on the other hand supported .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and therefore in the light of the Bombay High Court judgement in case of CCE, Nagpur Vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd. (supra), the impugned credit was not admissible, I find that in the related Show Cause Notice, the impugned credit was denied only on the ground that the impugned service was not an input service as it had no nexus with the manufacture of the final product and therefore, the ground on wh .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... (see last para). That part of the observation made by the Larger Bench cannot be upheld, because, once the service tax is borne by the ultimate consumer of the service, namely the worker, the manufacturer cannot take credit of that part of the service tax which is borne by the consumer. Shri Shridharan, learned Counsel for the assessee fairly conceded to the above position in law and in fact file .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appellant only and thus the facts in these appeals are distinguishable from the facts obtaining in the case of CCE, Nagpur Vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd. (supra). 5. In the light of the foregoing discussion, I do not find the impugned order sustainable. Therefore the impugned order is set aside and appeals allowed with consequential relief to the applicant, if any.
Case laws, Decisions, Judgements .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X