Feedback   New User   Subscription   Demo   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. TTK Prestige Ltd. Versus CCE, Chennai

2018 (2) TMI 808 - CESTAT CHENNAI

CENVAT credit - Department was of the view that the credit on various services is not eligible as the services were rendered at various other places for which the corporate office had made payments - Held that: - When the corporate office of he appellant has taken input service distributor registration, the distribution of credit on ISD invoices is in accordance with law. Intention of having ISD registration is for distribution of credit when there are more than one unit. - All the activitie .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

AC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Per Bench The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Stainless Steel Pressure Cookers and Pressure Pans and Aluminium Pressure Cookers and Pressure Pans and are registered with the Central Excise Department. They are availing credit on inputs and input services. The appellants availed credit of input services based on the invoices issued by their corporate office. The department was of the view that the credit on various services is not eligible as the serv .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ave availed the credit based on the invoices issued by distribution of service tax credit by their corporate office at Bangalore for the services consumed either at their corporate office or at branches at various places. The department has proceeded to deny the credit alleging that the services have not been consumed at their manufacturing unit but these input services do not have nexus with the manufacturing activities. The appellants having availed the credit on the ISD invoices distributed b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in page 68 to 72 of the appeal paper book. In the case of CCE Nagpur Vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd. 2010 (20) STR 577 (Bom.) and Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Pune 2009 (242) ELT 168 (Bom.), the Hon ble High Court of Bombay had occasion to consider the eligibility of almost all the services impugned herein. It was held by the High Court that the definition having a wide meaning covers all the activities in relation to business. 3. The LD. AR, Shri R. Subramaniyam, AC, reiterated the findings in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

etails of SCN and the amount involved as tabulated by the appellants shown as under:- Sl.No. SCN No. & Date Period of Dispute Amt. involved (Rs.) 1 No. 10/2010 dt.02.02.10 August 2005 to March 2009 1,60,86,994 2 No. V/15/73/36/2010 dt. 04.03.2010 April 2009 4,99,919 3 No. V/15/73/36/2010 dt. 10.03.2010 April 2009 4,90,700 4 No. V/15/73/36/2010 dt. 17.03.2010 April 2009 4,91,939 5 No. V/15/73/36/2010 dt. 24.03.2010 April 2009 4,48,775 6 No. 41-A dt. 02.06.2010 May 2009 to March 2010 1,04,62,3 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version