TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 886X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Rule 7 of the Cenvat Credit Rules - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/23761/2014-SM - 21537/2016 - Dated:- 20-12-2016 - Shri S. S. Garg, Judicial Member Shri R. Muralidharan, Advocate For the Appellant Dr. Ezhil Mathi, AR For the Respondent ORDER Per: S. S. Garg This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 18.09.2014 vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeal of the appellant and upheld the Order-in-Original. Briefly the facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of various Bio-technology products such as Enzymes, Antibodies, Proteins, DNAs, Reagents, Educational kits, Research Kits, Cell Culture Chemicals, etc falling under Chapte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s well as by ignoring judicial precedents of the higher Courts. He further submitted that the definition of input service as per Rule 2(l) is wide enough to cover all services which are used whether directly or indirectly, in or in relation to the manufacture of final product. He further submitted that the Scientific and Technical Consultancy Services is not included in the exclusion clause. He further submits that the services provided have a direct nexus with the manufacturing activity and is covered under the definition of input service contained in Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules. The learned counsel also referred to the Consultancy Agreement dated 31.03.2011 executed between the appellant and M/s. MERCK KGaA, Germany that the serv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not necessarily have the registration number of the recipients. The STRC No. indicated in the ISD invoice does not prohibit the availment of credit by the appellant in the manufacturing unit. In support of this submission, he relied upon the following authorities: a) SS Engineers Vs. CCE, Pune-I 2015 (38) S.T.R. 614 (Tri.) Affirmed in 2016 (42) S.T.R. 3 (Bom.) b) Pipavav Shipyard Ltd. Vs. CCE ST, Bhavnagar 2016 (41) S.T.R. 151 (Tri.-Ahmd.) 3.2. He further submitted that in terms of Rule 7 of Cenvat Credit Rules, prior to insertion of Clause (c) in Rule 7 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 vide Notification No. 18/2012 made w.e.f. 01.04.2012, there is no bar on input service distributor to distribute the credit pertaining to one ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
