TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 7X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und that if the common service was used by more than one factory then appellant shall be entitled for the Cenvat credit only on pro-rata basis attributed to Dahej factory - However, this aspect has not been examined by the lower authorities. It is also observed that the Commissioner (Appeals) in its order refrained from giving findings as regard admissibility of input service in terms of Rule 2(l) of CCR. There are no option except to remand the matter to the Adjudicating Authority to pass a fresh order, after considering all the issues - appeal allowed by way of remand. - Excise Appeal No. 10327 of 2018 - FINAL ORDER NO. A/11994 / 2019 - Dated:- 29-10-2019 - MR. RAMESH NAIR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND MR. RAJU, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e denied as held by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Doshion Limited vs. CCE 2016 (41_ STR 884 (Guj.) , whereby the decision of this Tribunal reported at 2013 (288) ELT 291 (Tri.) was upheld. As regards the credit availed in respect of input service for godown rent, he submits that since the said godown is used for storage and sale of the goods manufactured in the factory, the service is directly related to the factory, therefore, credit is admissible. He placed reliance on the on the following judgments:- (a) Vako Seals Pvt. Limited vs. CCE, Mumbai 2015 (40) STR 594 (Tri. Mumbai) (b) Valco Industries Limited vs. CCE, Chandigarh 2012 (28) STR 457 (Tri. Del.) 3. As regards th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the impugned order. He further submits that as per Rule 7 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 it is necessary that if the invoices for the service was issued in the name of head office, then the credit can be availed only by the input service distribution. In the present case, head office of the appellant was not registered as input service distributor therefore, credit taken by the appellant is incorrect. 5. Heard both sides and perused the record. We find that the credit was denied on the ground that head office of the appellant is not registered as input service distributor. The invoices issued in respect of services in question were addressed to other head office or their Taloja godown. We find that for majority of the period invo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
