VIKRAM ISPAT Vs. COMMR. OF C. EX.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellants in this case were issued four show cause notices requiring them to file appeals in EA -3 form instead of ST -5 form under which the appeals have been filed.

(2.) LD . Advocate for the Appellants submitted that the issue involved in the four appeals is regarding denial of CENVAT credit availed by them on Cellular Mobile Telephony Services, Rent -a -cab service. Club or Association service and security service and since the matter relates to credit on input services, the appeal in ST -5 form is correct as the demand have to be issued under Section 73 of Finance Act and not Section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944 as has been done in the present case. He further submitted that an appeal in ST -4 form under Section 85 was filed before Commissioner (Appeals) which was accepted and no objection was raised. In view of this they are not required to file appeal in EA -3 form.

(3.) I have considered the submission.