9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 135X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ariff Act, 1985 and is registered with the Central Excise Department for the above manufacturing activity. They are availing CENVAT Credit on inputs, capital goods and input services and utilize the same towards payment of Central Excise Duty. 2.1 During the course of verification of records, it was brought to the notice of the Officers of the Department that the appellant had availed Credit of service tax paid on various services viz., Courier Service, Business Support Service, Business Auxiliary Service, Labour Charges, Electrical Maintenance Charges, Testing Charges and Technical Inspection Charges, Payroll Processing outsourced to the external agency, Technical, Testing and Analysis Services. Three Show Cause Notices were issued to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lso set aside the demand, interest and penalty with regard to the demand on Business Support Service, Business Auxiliary Service, Electrical Maintenance and Courier charges. Aggrieved by the disallowance of Credit on Payroll Processing, Labour Charges and Testing Charges & Technical Inspection Charges for the period April 2015 to July 2015, September 2015, November 2015 and December 2015, the assessee is in appeal before this forum. 3. Today when the matter came up for hearing, Ld. Consultants Shri. Adithya Srinivasan, Ms. Meghna Arvind, and Shri. Siddharth Mallinathan appeared on behalf of the assessee and Ld. AC (AR) Shri. L. Nandakumar appeared on behalf of the Revenue. 4.1 During the course of hearing, Ld. Consultants stated that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hese activities were indeed used in the manufacture of their finished goods; that presently the appellant was able to collate the technical inspection reports, invoice copies and contracts awarded to technical inspection agencies, which were attached as Annexure-E therein. Therefore, Ld. Consultants prayed that matter pertaining to these services be remanded back to the adjudicating authority in the light of their submission of necessary documentary evidences. 5. Per contra, Ld. AR supported the findings of the lower authorities. 6.1 From a reading of the above Order of this Bench in the appellant's own case (supra), I find that this Bench has held as under: "Appellant's claim is that the items mentioned in para 7 of the appellate order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Order has held that "quality control is an eligible input service and they are eligible for the testing and inspection charges". However, he has upheld the denial of credit on the same on the ground of lack of proof evidencing their nexus with the manufacture of finished goods. I note that there is no dispute on eligibility and the disallowance of Credit was only for want of necessary documentary evidences, which have now been duly furnished and annexed herein by the appellant. 7.2 On this, Ld. AR submitted that the above documents since not furnished before the adjudicating authority, require verification. Ld. Consultants for the assessee submitted that the appellant has no objection for verification by the adjudicating authority. Going ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
