M\/s Vardhman Acrylics Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax, – Vadodara
Central Excise
2018 (5) TMI 1499 – CESTAT AHMEDABAD – TMI
CESTAT AHMEDABAD – AT
Dated:- 22-2-2018
Appeal No E\/10068\/2018 – A\/10476\/2018
Central Excise
\nDr. D. M. Misra, Member (Judicial)
\nFor Appellant (s) Shri Willingdon Christian, Advocate
\nFor Respondent (s): Shri K.J. Kinariwala, AR
\nPer : Dr. D. M. Misra
\nHeard both sides.
\n2. This is an appeal filed against the order-in-appeal No. VAD-EXCUS- 002-APP-295-2017-18 dated 09 08.2017 passed by Commissioner (Appeals), Central Goods and Service Tax-Vadodara
\n3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant has availed Cenvat credit of service tax paid on Manp<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n ing of finished goods from one godown to another godown and loading of trucks and trailers etc. It is his contention that the service received by the appellant has nexus with the manufacturing activity, therefore, the service tax paid on Manpower Supply Service by the service provider is eligible to credit. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" M\/s Vardhman Acrylics Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax, – VadodaraCentral Excise2018 (5) TMI 1499 – CESTAT AHMEDABAD – TMICESTAT AHMEDABAD – ATDated:- 22-2-2018Appeal No E\/10068\/2018 – A\/10476\/2018Central Excise Dr. D. M. Misra, Member (Judicial) For Appellant (s) Shri Willingdon Christian, Advocate For Respondent (s): Shri K.J. Kinariwala, AR Per : Dr. … Continue reading “M\/s Vardhman Acrylics Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax, – Vadodara”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-11933","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11933","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=11933"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11933\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=11933"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=11933"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=11933"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n5. L d AR for the Revenue reiterated the findings of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals)
\n6. I find that undisputedly the appellant had received the services relating to Manpower Supply from the service provider and used the said service in or in relation to the manufacturing of finished goods, that is, shifting the raw-material finished goods from one godown to another godown, hence, definitely has nexus with the manufacturing activity, Acc<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n