9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 1843X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hnical) For the Appellant : Shri Bharat Raichandani, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Bidhan Chandra, Authorized Representative ORDER PER: S.K. MOHANTY Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the appellant herein is engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods viz. sugar, molasses etc., falling under Chapter 17 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aken over by the bank under the provisions of SRFAESI Act, 2002 and leased out to the appellant for a period of five years for the purpose of running the sugar mill; that the agreed amount of the lease rent was being paid by the appellant and that the appellant had availed Cenvat credit of Service Tax in the capacity of recipient of "Renting of Immovable Property Services" in respect of the rent a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellant was disallowed and the appellant was directed to pay the interest liability thereon. Besides, the said order also imposed equal amount of penalty on the appellant. Feeling aggrieved with the impugned order, the appellant has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal. 2. The learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that since the appellant is a manufacturer of excisable goo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of Revenue that service tax liability in respect of the taxable service viz. Renting of Immovable Property has not been discharged in the present case. The service tax amount in question was actually paid by the appellant and the same was deposited into the Central Government account in the name of the original owner M/s TTSSK. The department in this case, has not disputed the fact that othe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e jurisdictional service tax authorities. Perusal of the case records reveals that in this case, the appellant had deposited the service tax on the taxable service and also accounted for the same in its books of accounts. Thus, under such circumstances, denial of Cenvat benefit to the appellant cannot be considered as legal and proper. 6. In view of above, we do not find any merits in the impugn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
