2014 (5) TMI 1146 - AT - Service Tax

CENVAT credit - duty paying invoices - debit notes issued by the service provider - Held that - Examination of record reveals that the decision taken by the adjudicating authority does not show the consideration of documents on record and decision arrived by him was not proper and legal - matter remanded to the adjudicating authority to consider their documents on record - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance of Cenvat credit based on debit notes issued by the service provider.
2. Failure to provide necessary documents for availing Cenvat credit.
3. Lack of proper consideration of documents by the adjudicating authority.
4. Remand of the matter for reevaluation and provision of further documents.

Analysis:
1. The appellant contended that Cenvat credit of the input service, amounting to Rs. 44,016/- based on debit notes, was not allowed by the department. The Assistant Commissioner held that the appellant failed to submit invoices with required details or produce challans evidencing service tax payment against the debit note. Debit notes were deemed invalid for availing Cenvat credit, leading to a contravention of Rule 9(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.

2. The department highlighted a letter requesting specific details from the appellant regarding the installation of common DG sets and rental of immovable property against the Cenvat credit utilized for service tax payment. The appellant failed to provide the requested documents initially, claiming they were already submitted to the department. The lack of document submission raised concerns during the proceedings.

3. The examination of records revealed that the adjudicating authority's decision lacked proper consideration of the available documents. Consequently, the Technical Member set aside the findings and remanded the matter for the adjudicating authority to reevaluate the documents on record. The appellants were directed to provide additional necessary documents as per the department's request within a specified timeframe.

4. The stay petition was disposed of, and the appeal was allowed through remand, emphasizing the need for a thorough review of documents and completion of proceedings within a stipulated timeframe to ensure procedural fairness and compliance with legal requirements.