TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 874X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is Tribunal in the case of CCE,Coimbatore Vs. Luxmi Technology & Engineering Indus. Ltd. in favour of the appellant, where it was held that Rule 3(1) of the CENVAT Credit Rules - a provider of taxable service is also entitled to take credit of specified excise duty, additional duty of customs and service tax in respect of input services and utilize the credit from all these sources for the purpose of paying service tax. Extended period of limitation is not attracted in view of the earlier Audit Report for December to January, 2009-2010 and also under the fact that the whole exercise is revenue neutral. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - MA-51778/15 & S.T. Appeal No. 52819/15 - ORDER NO.70716/2016 - Dated:- 9-3-2016 - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proposed under section 76 and 78 of the Act. 3. The appellant contested the show cause and vide OIO dated 11/9/14, the SCN was adjudicated and the proposed demand confirmed and the amount of ₹ 4,53,200/- was appropriated for the amount of ₹ 36,817/- deposited, was also appropriated with interest and penalty of ₹ 25,84,001/- was imposed under section 78 of the Act. Being aggrieved the appellant preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who vide the impugned order was pleased to reject the appeal. Being aggrieved, the appellant is before this Tribunal. 4. The ld. Counsel for the appellant, states that there is no restriction in utilising the credit taken under the Cenvat Credit Rules. The appellant have right ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itled to refund of the unutilised Cenvat credit being 100% EOU. The ld. Counsel also points out that the whole demand is for the extended period and the same is bad there being no malafide, suppression on their part. 4.1 By way of the Misc.Application, he has brought on record a copy of Audit Report for the year - 2004. Audit conducted for the period April, 2008 to November,2009 and the last date of Audit conducted was 29.12.09 and in the report, it is mentioned that the appellant haven't paid service tax on the rental income and interest was demanded for delayed payment. Subsequently, the said payment had been paid on 11.01.2010 through GAR Challan. It is further a matter of fact that the appellant have filed regular returns both un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
