CESTAT, MUMBAI BENCH
Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax
versus
Lupin Ltd.
P.R. CHANDRASEKHARAN, TECHNICAL MEMBER
FINAL ORDER NOS. A/51-57/2012-WZB/C-IV(SMB)
STAY ORDER NOS. 125-128/2012-WZB/C-IV (SMB)
MISC. ORDER NOS. M/41-46/2012-WZB/C-IV (SMB)
APPLICATION NOS. E/STAY/832, 831, 833 and 375/2010-MUM.
& E/COD/324,E/COD/792-794/2010 & E/COD/323 & 322/2011-MUM
APPEAL NOS. E/343/2011-Mum and E/704,703,705
& E/342, 341 & 301/2010-Mum And E/341& 342/2011
APRIL 20, 2012
ORDER
There are four appeals along with stay applications and condonation of delay applications filed by M/s. Lupin Ltd., against order-in-appeal No. SB/20-25/LTU/MUM/2009, dated 30-11-2009 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) of Central Excise and Service Tax, LTU, Mumbai. Against the said order they have filed a composite appeal within the time and, therefore, they, were directed to file separate appeals on account of which there was a delay of 59 days in filing the appeals. Considering the reason for delay is satisfactory, I allow the applications for condonation of delay in filing the appeals.
2. Against the very same order-in-appeal the department has also filed four appeals along with the applications for condonation of delay in three cases and the delay is 357 days. The reason for the delay is that the department has filed composite appeal against the impugned Order within time. The Registry directed them to file separate appeals and hence the delay in filing these appeals. As the explanation given is satisfactory, I allow the applications for condonation of delay.
3. The issue involved in this case is eligibility of Cenvat credit of the service tax paid on various input services viz –
