2010 (10) TMI 403 - AT - Service Tax

Waiver of pre-deposit - the applicants herein are liable to pay the Cenvat credit availed of the input services on the ground that the tax paying document is a consolidated one and not in individual s name - Cenvat credit availed of the input service needs to be considered from the provisions of Cenvat credit rules and the service tax rules wherein the issuance of invoice is contemplated by a service provider - The applicants are directed to produce certificate from the Range officer in respect of freezing of the said amount within four weeks from today and report compliance on 26th November, 2010 before Assistant Registrar - Appeal is disposed of

Summary

Issues: Stay petitions against waiver of pre-deposit of Cenvat credit and penalty amounts.

Analysis:
1. Issue of Liability for Cenvat Credit: The lower authorities found the applicants liable for paying Cenvat credit on input services due to the tax paying document being in a consolidated name, not individual names. The counsel argued that all applicants are heirs/successors of M/s. D.C. Shah, co-owners of the building, and registered as service providers for renting immovable property. They claimed Cenvat credit for various services received. The dispute arose as the invoices were in the name of D.C. Shah and Others, with applicants being heirs or successors. The judge noted the need to consider Cenvat credit rules and service tax rules regarding invoice issuance by service providers.

2. Verification and Compliance: The judge directed the applicants to freeze the confirmed Cenvat credit amount and produce a certificate from the Range officer within four weeks. Compliance was to be reported before the Assistant Registrar by a specified date. Upon compliance, the waiver of pre-deposit was allowed, and recovery stayed until the appeal's disposal. The judge accepted the counsel's request to expedite the appeal's disposal once the freezing of the amount was confirmed.

3. Disposal of Appeal: Considering the case's narrow scope and the amount falling within the Single Member Bench's jurisdiction, the judge agreed to list the matter for disposal on a specific date once compliance was reported. The oral prayer of the counsel was accepted, emphasizing the importance of following the Tribunal's order for freezing the amount to expedite the appeal process.

This detailed analysis covers the issues surrounding the stay petitions, liability for Cenvat credit, verification requirements, compliance directives, and the process for appeal disposal as outlined in the judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Bangalore.