CCE Vs. B.S.B.K. PVT. LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REVENUE filed this appeal against Order -in -Appeal No. 11 -ST/RPR -II/2008 dated 9.4.2008 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Raipur.

(2.) THE relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the respondents are engaged in providing taxable service of Industrial Construction. It has been alleged that the respondents availed credit on mobile phone during the period up to 31 March, 2006. Scrutiny of the bills of mobile phones revealed that the mobile phone bills were not issued in the name of the respondent company. It has further been alleged that the bills were issued in the name of staff and employees of the respondent company and, therefore, the respondent is not eligible to take the credit. The original authority disallowed the credit of Rs. 57,117/ - and imposed penalty of Rs. 2,000/ -. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the impugned order. Hence, the Revenue filed this appeals.

(3.) LEARNED Advocate on behalf of the respondents reiterates the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). He submits that the respondents submitted the statement of payment of bills. He further submits that there is a categorical averment on behalf of the respondents that mobile phones were used in relation to the business activities which was not refuted in the grounds of appeal filed by the Revenue. He relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CCE v. Excel Corporation Care Ltd. reported in : 2008 (12) STR 436 (Guj.). He also relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Wiptech Peripherals Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Rajkot reported in : 2008 (12) STR 716 (Tri. -Ahmd.). He also submits that the demand of tax is clearly barred by limitation.