Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

Wrigley India Pvt.Ltd vs Cce, Chandigarh on 29 August, 2016

        

 

CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, 
SCO 147-148, SECTOR 17-C, CHANDIGARH-160017

SINGLE MEMBER BENCH
Court-I
Appeal No.E/95/2016
[Arising out of the OIA No.JAL-EXCUS-000-APP-197-14-15 dt.7.8.2014 passed by the CCE(Appeals), Chandigarh)

Date of Hearing/Decision: 29.08.2016
For Approval & signature:

Honble Mr.Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)

1.
Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
No
2.
Whether it would be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
No
3.
Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the order?
seen
4.
Whether order is to be circulated to the Department Authorities?
Yes
                                                                      
Wrigley India Pvt.Ltd.					Appellant

                        Vs.
CCE, Chandigarh						Respondent

Present for the Appellant: Shri R.k.Sharma, Advocate Present for the Respondent: Shri Rk.Sharma, AR Coram: Honble Mr.Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) FINAL ORDER NO. 61256/2016 PER: ASHOK JINDAL The short issue involved in the matter is whether the appellant is entitled to avail credit on the services, namely outdoor catering, rent-a-cab, manpower for gardening and housekeeping. During the period April 2005 to May 2007 or not.

2. Heard the parties and considered the submissions.

3. Considering the fact that as held by the honble Bombay High Court in the case of ultratech Cement-2010 (260) ELT 269 (Bom.) that any services availed by the manufacturer of excisable goods during the course of business of manufacturing is entitled to input service credit. Therefore, the fact is not in dispute that these services availed by the appellant during the course of business of manufacturing, the credit cannot be denied to the appellant.

4. In view of the above observation, I set aside the impugned order and allow the credit availed by the appellant.

5. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.

(dictated and pronounced in the court) (ASHOK JINDAL) MEMBER (JUDICIAL) mk 1