Rane Brake lining Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Puducherry
Central Excise
2019 (1) TMI 169 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 28-12-2018
Appeal No. E\/42315-42317\/2018 – FINAL ORDER No. 43189-43191\/2018
Central Excise
Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical)
\nMs. S. Sridevi, Advocate For the Appellant
\nShri L. Nandakumar, AC (AR) For the Respondent
\nORDER
\nAll the three appeals since relating to the same appellant and involving identical dispute, they are taken up for common disposal.
\n2. The common facts of these cases are that appellants, engaged in manufacture inter alia of Brake Lining, Disc Pads etc. had taken input service credit on outward transportation, car hiring, car<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n onsidered = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n 4. She submits that prior to 1.4.2011 the said definition did not have any restrictions or bar for availing input credits in respect of canteen service , car hire. She further submits that that a number of Tribunal decisions have consistently upheld the eligibility of such input credits prior to 1.4.2011, for example, in Scope International Pvt. Ltd. Vs CCE Chennai – 2018 (7) TMI 1007 – CESTAT Chennai. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Rane Brake lining Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, PuducherryCentral Excise2019 (1) TMI 169 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMICESTAT CHENNAI – ATDated:- 28-12-2018Appeal No. E\/42315-42317\/2018 – FINAL ORDER No. 43189-43191\/2018Central ExciseShri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) Ms. S. Sridevi, Advocate For the Appellant Shri L. Nandakumar, AC (AR) For the Respondent ORDER All … Continue reading “Rane Brake lining Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Puducherry”<\/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-15922","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15922","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=15922"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15922\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=15922"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=15922"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=15922"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\nSCN NO.LTUC\/353\/2010-DC DT 09.12.2010
\nSCN NO.LTUC\/364\/2011-DC DT 23.11.2011
\nPeriod of demand
\nFeb 2009 to Nov 2009
\n
\nDec 2009 to Nov 2010
\nDec 2010 to March 2011
\nDetails of credit availed
\nGTA-Rs.2,20,216
\nCar hiring- Rs. 3416\/-
\nCanteen\/ODC-Rs.1,21,216
\n
\nGTA-Rs.1,59,770
\nCar hiring- Rs. 18,841\/-
\nCanteen\/ODC-Rs.1,69,248\/-
\nGTA-Rs.53,506
\nCar hiring- Rs. 3165\/-
\nCanteen\/ODC-Rs.73,005
\nOrder in Original No.
\n10\/2018 dt.28.02.2018
\n
\n12\/2018 dt.28\/02.2018
\n13\/2018 dt.28.02.2018
\nDetails of Credit allowed
\nGTA -Rs.2,20,216\/-
\n
\nGTA -Rs.1,59,770\/-
\nGTA -Rs.53,506\/-
\nDetails of Credit denied in respect of car hiring and outdoor catering
\nRs.3416\/- + Rs. 1,21,307\/-
\n
\nRs.18,841\/- + Rs. 1,69,248\/-\n<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n5. On the other hand, Ld. A.R Shri L.Nandakumar supports the impugned order.
\n6. Heard both sides and have gone through the facts. The only dispute in these appeals are pertaining to car repair and canteen services. I find that the Ld. Advocate is correct in her assertion that there was no restriction or bar in the definition of 'input serv<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n