TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1170X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of CCE Vs Gujarat Heavy Chemicals Ltd [2011 (5) TMI 132 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT]. However, I find that while imposing penalty under Rule 15(2) of CCR,2004 both the authorities below had not allowed the option to discharge 25% of the penalty subject to fulfillment of the conditions laid down under Sec.11AC of CEA,1944. Thus, the Appellant are entitled to discharge 25% of the penalty imposed on them, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in the manufacture of Excisable goods and had availed CENVAT Credit of ₹ 3,80,070/- for the period December 2007 to March 2011 on the rent paid in maintenance of their guest house, which was alleged to be not an input service. Accordingly, a demand notice was issued to them for recovery of said credit and proposal for penalty. On adjudication, the demand was confirmed and penalty of eq ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of CCE Vs Gujarat Heavy Chemicals - 2011 (22) STR 610 (Guj), has clearly held that the services provided in the residential quarters of manufacturer are ineligible to CENVAT Credit. 6. I find that providing of service at guest house cannot be considered to be an input service and eligible to CENVAT Credit in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CCE Vs Gujara ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
