TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 27X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rages (P) Ltd [2011 (2) TMI 400 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] were considering similar issue wherein the availment of CENVAT credit on TMT bars for construction of warehouses which were used for rendering storage and warehousing services was contested by the Revenue and it was held that assessee used cement and TMT bar for providing storage facility without which storage and warehousing services could not have been provided and credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ST/28078/2013-DB - Final Order No. A/ 31464 / 2017 - Dated:- 7-9-2017 - Mr. M. V. Ravindran, Member ( Judicial ) And Mr. Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member ( Technical ) Mr. M.S. Nagaraj, Adv for the Appellant Mr. Raj Kumar, A.R. for the Respo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dit of the CENVAT account. Revenue is not contesting any portion of the impugned order. Appellant is contesting confirmation of demand availment of ineligible credit, with interest and also penalties imposed. 4. Learned counsel after taking the bench through the case records submits that it is undisputed that inputs and input services were utilised for fabrication/manufacturing of floating structures which were subsequently utilised for rendering output services. He would submit that the issue is now squarely covered by the decision of the Hon ble High Court of A.P. in the case of CCE Visakhapatnam II Vs Sai Sahmita Storages (P) Ltd [2011(23)STR 341(A.P.) and also the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Navaratna S.G. Highway Propert ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hon ble High Court Andhra Pradesh in the case of Sai Sahmita Storages (P) Ltd were considering similar issue wherein the availment of CENVAT credit on TMT bars for construction of warehouses which were used for rendering storage and warehousing services was contested by the Revenue and their Lordships in paragraph 9 held as under: 9. There is no dispute, in these cases, that the assessee used cement and TMT bar for providing storage facility without which storage and warehousing services could not have been provided. Therefore the finding of the original authority as well as the appellate authority are clearly erroneous, which was correctly rectified by the CESTAT. In so far as the levy of penalty under Rule 15(2) of the Rules is conc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
