2018 (9) TMI 895 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI – CENVAT credit – input service – ‘Rent-a-Cab’ services for the staff/employees working in the office/factory – Held that:- Tribunal in the case of Capsugel healthcare Ltd. [2016 (2) TMI 977 – CESTAT CHANDIGARH] has held that Rent-a-Cab services availed by the assessee for the employees bringing them from their residence to factory or vice versa, qualifies as input services – Prior to 01.04.2011, Rent-a-Cab services are eligible input services and Cenvat credit cannot be denied on these input services.
–
Credit allowed – appeal allowed – decided in favor of appellant. – E/40082/2018 – Final Order No. 41977/2018 – Dated:- 28-6-2018 – Shri P. Dinesha, Judicial Member Ms. P. Srija, Advocate for the
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
and SCN was issued proposing to recover the wrongly availed Cenvat credit alleging that the same is ineligible under Rule 14 of CCR, 2004 read with Section 11A of the CEA, 1944, along with appropriate interest and imposition of penalty. After due process of law, the adjudicating authority disallowed the same alleging that it was wrongly availed for the above period and also levied applicable interest and penalty. On appeal, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the denial of Cenvat credit, but set aside the penalty imposed by the adjudicating authority. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant is before this forum. 2. Heard Ms. P. Srija, Ld. Advocate for the appellant and Shri R. Subramaniyam, AC (AR) for the Revenue. 3. It was argued by th
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
be denied to the appellants. She has relied on the decision of the Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Delhi Vs. Capsugel Healthcare Ltd. – 2016 (44) STR 101 (Tri.-Chan.) in support of her contentions. 3. On behalf of Revenue, Ld. AR supported the impugned order. 4. Heard both sides and perused the records. 5. On perusal of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Capsugel healthcare Ltd. (supra) relied on by the Ld. Advocate, it is seen that the Tribunal followed the decision of the Hon ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Ultratech Cement Ltd. – 2010 (20) STR 577 (Bom.) wherein, it has been held that Rent-a-Cab services availed by the assessee for the employees bringing them from their residence to factory or vice v
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =