M\/s Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Tax, Visakhapatnam – GST
Central Excise
2019 (2) TMI 748 – CESTAT HYDERABAD – TMI
CESTAT HYDERABAD – AT
Dated:- 23-1-2019
Appeal No. E\/30669\/2018 – A\/30126\/2019
Central Excise
Mr. P. VENKATA SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)
\nSmt Swetha, Advocate for the Appellant.
\nShri AVLN Chary, Superintendent (AR) for the Respondent.
\nORDER
\nPer: P. Venkata Subba Rao
\nThis appeal is filed against Order-in-Appeal No. VIZ-EXCUS-002-APP-130-17-18 dated 22.02.2018.
\n2. The appellants are engaged in manufacturing various iron and steel products and availed CENVAT credit in various inputs and input services used by them. Three show cause notices were issued covering the per<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n and imposed penalties as proposed in the show cause notice. Aggrieved, the appellant preferred an appeal before the First Appellate Authority who upheld the order of the lower authority and rejected the appeal. Hence this appeal. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n e that all these bills raised were in the name of the appellant (a public sector undertaking) and not in the name of any individual. The actual person who stayed in the accommodation booked or enjoyed the food at the restaurant etc., could be an individual, say, an employee of the appellant firm or somebody else in relation to some business of the appellant. This should not matter as long as the services are in relation to their business. Under these circumstances, it cannot be said they are not related to their business activity. Respectfully following the decisions of this bench in Final Order Nos. A\/30916\/2016 & A\/30582\/2017, I hold that the appellant is entitled to the credit of CENVAT on the disputed services. In view of the above, I f<\/p>\n = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" M\/s Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Tax, Visakhapatnam – GSTCentral Excise2019 (2) TMI 748 – CESTAT HYDERABAD – TMICESTAT HYDERABAD – ATDated:- 23-1-2019Appeal No. E\/30669\/2018 – A\/30126\/2019Central ExciseMr. P. VENKATA SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Smt Swetha, Advocate for the Appellant. Shri AVLN Chary, Superintendent (AR) for the Respondent. ORDER Per: P. Venkata … Continue reading “M\/s Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Tax, Visakhapatnam – GST”<\/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-16752","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16752","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=16752"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16752\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=16752"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=16752"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=16752"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n3. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that on similar issue in respect of the same appellant this bench had vide Final Order No. A\/30916\/2016 dated 28.09.2016 as reported in [2016 (12) TMI 271- CESTAT, Hyderabad] allowed them credit on authorized service station services, outdoor catering services, mandap keeper services, convention service holding that these services were availed by the appellant in connection with their business and were not meant for personal consumption as alleged by the Department. Fol<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n