(1.) THE Appellant seeks waiver of pre -deposit and stay of recovery of Rs. 8,20,862/ -, applicable interest and penalty of Rs. 10,000/ - imposed on them for having availed inadmissible input credit during the period April 2005 to June 2007. The facts of the case are that the Appellant is an Assessee engaged in manufacture of corrugated boxes subject to excise duty. It had engaged services of 'Commission Agent' for procuring orders for sale of goods. They have availed credit of Rs. 8,20,862/ - under the Cenvat Credit Scheme. The lower authority found that the impugned credit was not admissible in terms of Rule 2(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that the service of commission agent is for the activity of selling the goods and not in relation to manufacture and clearance of finished goods from the place of removal. The services of commission agent were received for an event after the manufacture and clearance of the goods and in terms of Rule 2(1)(ii) of Cenvat Credit Rules, the impugned service was not qualified for the Assessee to take credit.
(2.) THE ld. SDR submits that in Chemplast Sanmar Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem : [2010 (17) S.T.R. 253 : 2010 (250) E.L.T. 46 (Tri. - Chennai)] the Tribunal had held that credit of service tax paid on commission agent's service was not admissible.
(3.) I have carefully considered the submissions. I find that Rule 2(1) in question reads as follows: