TMI Blog2008 (11) TMI 200X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ajority of the cases on second limb of definition, the Appellant should have led evidence for its defence. – Stay granted partly. - E/2165-2167/2008 - 7-9/2009-EX(PB), - Dated:- 28-11-2008 - S/Shri D.N. Panda, Member (J) and Rakesh Kumar, Member (T) Shri Ravi Raghvan, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Anil Khanna, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : D.N. Panda, Member (J)].- This matter was earlier before this Bench on 19-11-08. That was adjourned to 20-11-08 at the request of Appellant. But that could not be heard on that day completely for want of certain details. On 20-11-08 ld. Counsel was directed to submit break-up of the services on which Cenvat credit was claimed as input service to examine justifiability thereof i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... usive definition of input service are also entitled to the Cenvat credit. He further argues that the show cause notice has only concentrated on place of removal of goods to enjoy service tax credit which is totally misconceived. 3. He argues that when there was no charge in show cause notice granting opportunity of defence to plead that the Cenvat credit is not admissible in relation to other activities enumerated in the inclusive part of the definition, the adjudication is beyond the scope of show cause notice. In support of this, he relied on various judgments and submits that when adjudication goes beyond the charges of show cause notice the assessment is bad. Also he relies on certain judgments to submit that the canteen services pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ive link or nexus, the appellant is only pleading for waiver of pre-deposit. He further submits that detailed exercise being involved in three cases, and today the appellant having filed paper book giving the details at pages 167 to 170, that itself proves that the matter calls for legal test on the basis of evidence and rule of law. Therefore, in all the three cases, the appellants are required to make pre-deposit. 6. Heard both the sides and perused the record. 7. There is no doubt that the show cause notice has an object to test the veracity of the appellant's claim in all the three cases as to Cenvat credit in relation to service tax suffered by them. The show cause notice was meant to test whether claim made by the appellant me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oth the sides, we are of the view that the matter requires thorough examination as to the attribution of the respective service to the credit claimed so as to arrive at a conclusion as to their allocation to manufacturing as well as non-manufacturing activities. It would therefore be proper to insist pre-deposit. Such attribution being absent in assessment and as to the details appearing in pages 167 to 170 which need thoroughly examination, we are prima facie of the view that in order to protect interest of revenue, the appellant should be directed to make pre-deposit of following amounts within a period of eight weeks from today as follows: Appeal case No. Amount of pre-deposit directed 1. Appeal case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
