TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 70X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the service provider in terms of Rule 2(a) of CCR, 2004. The appellant is entitled to the Cenvat credit on service tax paid on the aforesaid service - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ST Appeal No. 87678 of 2018 - A/86036/2019 - Dated:- 29-5-2019 - MR. AJAY SHARMA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri Mr. Rajeev D. Waglay, Advocate for the Appellant Shri Mr. S.B. Mane, Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER AJAY SHARMA: The instant Appeal arises from the impugned order dated 23.05.2015 passed by the IM/CGST A-1/MUM/66/18-19 in Order-in- Appeal No.IM/CGST A-1/MUM/66/18-19. The issue to be decided in the Appeal is whether the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wrongly availed and utilised by the Appellant alongwith interest under Section 75 r/w Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (hereinafter referred to as CCR, 2004 ) and also for imposing penalties u/Ss. 76,77 8 of Finance Act, 1994 r/w Rule 15 of CCR, 2004. The Adjudicating authority vide Order-in-Original dated 27.12.2016 confirmed the demand and ordered recovery of wrongly availed Cenvat Credit of ₹ 2,38,762/- with interest and penalty. The 1st Appellate Authority i.e. the learned Commissioner vide impugned order dated 7.6.2018 set aside the demand of ₹ 21,069/- qua Cenvat credit availed on professional service and upheld the demand of ₹ 2,17,693/- on Rent-a-cab service alongwith interest u/R. 14 of CCR, 2004 r/w Sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r xxx xxx xxx but excludes services, - xxx xxx xxx (B) provided by way of renting of a motor vehicle, in so far as they relate to a motor vehicle which is not a capital goods; or Xxx xxx xxx 5. An identical issue came up for consideration before a coordinate bench of the Tribunal in the matter of Marvel Vinyls Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore; 2017 (49)STR 424 (Tri.- Del) and the Trib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty has specifically observed that the said input service, i.e., renting of motor vehicles have been specifically included except in case where motor vehicle is eligible for Cenvat credit as capital goods. 5. He has however denied the benefit to the assessee on the ground that such motor vehicle are not capital goods for the appellant, Cenvat credit availed on the input services of renting of motor vehicle would not be admissible. 6. However, I find flaw in the above interpretation of appellate authority. He has rightly observed that the exclusion is only in respect of that motor vehicle which is not a capital goods. However, he has not extended the benefit to the assessee by observing that the same is n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
