9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 970X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mmissioner (AR) for the respondent ORDER The appellant, M/s Credit Suisse Business Analytics (India) Pvt Ltd, is before the Tribunal challenging partial rejection of claim for refund under rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, in order-in-appeal no. MKK/346/RGD APP/2018-19 dated 30th November 2018 of Commissioner of Central Tax, Central Excise & Service Tax (Appeals), Raigad, even as the partial ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... failed to submit corroborative invoices and of Rs. 34,984/- pertaining to 'works contract service' for not establishing eligibility to CENVAT credit. 3. According to Learned Counsel for the appellant, the present proceedings is limited to the rejection of the tax discharged on 'works contract service' amounting to Rs. 34,984/- and Rs. 43,271/- which was rejected on the ground of non-production of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y to establish eligibility for refund of tax paid on 'works contract service' rendered the impugned order to be legal and proper. 5. As pointed out by the Learned Counsel, submission of invoice is not enumerated in the safeguards and procedures prescribed in the relevant notification. Furthermore, the absence of invoice corresponding to credit taken by an assessee should be proceeded against for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontract service in the present case is input service and eligible of refund under Rule 5. As regard the service of short term accommodation and works contract service only related to Invoice No. Misc Bill/ Red Hat/Pune/13-14/01, dated 14-2-2014, since the appellant has withdrawn the claim of refund on this, the rejection of refund on services of short term accommodation and service involved in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
