2017 (2) TMI 1408

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Joint Commissioner (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER The above appeal is filed against the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) who modified the order passed by adjudicating authority who had dropped the demand, interest and penalties proposed. 2. The appellants are manufacturers of pre-fabricated building materials/industrial steel doors and are availing the facility of Cenvat credit of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ity on immovable property does not qualify as input service and relied upon Board Circular No. 98/1/2008-S.T., dated 4-1-2008. The Commissioner (Appeals) vide order impugned herein allowed the appeal filed by the department and thus disallowed the credit to the tune of Rs. 47,85,701/-. While doing so, the Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the definition of input services w.e.f. from 1-4-2011 ha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sions made before me and also perused the records. Undisputedly the amendment brought forth from 1-4-2011 does not have a retrospective application. The definition of input services as it stood prior to 1-4-2011 included the words "setting up of factory". Therefore the appellants are eligible for credit and the adjudicating authority has rightly dropped the proceedings. Therefore, I set aside the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X