9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (4) TMI 427 - AT - Service TaxPayment of service tax on input services through Cenvat Account instead of cash - Department was of the view that tax through Cenvat Account can be paid on any output service only & since GTA services is not an output service for the assessee, they cannot pay service tax by utilizing Cenvat Credit - Held that - As decided in Commissioner of Central Excise Vs Nahar Industrial Enterprises Ltd. (2010 (5) TMI 608 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT) a person who is not a actual service provider, but discharges the service tax liability on the Taxable Services, under Section 68(2) of Finance Act, 1994 as a deemed service provider, is entitled to avail the CENVAT credit on inputs/input services/capital goods for payment of GTA service tax, even if he is not using such inputs/input services/capital goods for providing taxable services by virtue of deeming legal fiction Court can discharge the service tax liability availing Cenvat Credit taken on inputs/input services even if these were not used in providing taxable service. Also see Commissioner of Service Tax Vs Hero Honda Motors Ltd. ( 2012 (12) TMI 734 - DELHI HIGH COURT). Thus assessee can pay the service tax liability on GTA service through Cenvat Account.
Issues:
1. Interpretation of Cenvat Credit utilization for service tax payment on input services. 2. Applicability of Cenvat Credit for GTA services. 3. Validity of penalty under section 76 of the Act. Issue 1: Interpretation of Cenvat Credit utilization for service tax payment on input services: The case involved M/s Kanoria Chemicals & Industries Ltd. availing Cenvat Credit for duty and tax paid on inputs, capital goods, and input services. The controversy arose when the assessee paid service tax on input services through Cenvat Account instead of cash. The Department contended that tax through Cenvat Account was permissible only for output services, not input services. A Show Cause Notice was issued, leading to the Commissioner confirming the tax amount and imposing penalties. The High Court's decision in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs Nahar Industrial Enterprises Ltd. was cited, where it was held that a person discharging service tax liability as a deemed service provider could avail Cenvat Credit, even if not directly providing taxable services. The Tribunal, following this legal precedent, ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing them to pay the service tax liability on GTA services through Cenvat Account. Issue 2: Applicability of Cenvat Credit for GTA services: The Revenue argued that since the assessee was not providing any output services, they should pay service tax in cash through PLA for GTA services. However, the Tribunal, based on the legal interpretation of deeming legal fiction, allowed the assessee to discharge the service tax liability using Cenvat Credit taken on inputs/input services, even if not directly used in providing taxable services. This decision was supported by previous judgments from the High Courts, including the Delhi High Court case of Commissioner of Service Tax Vs Hero Honda Motors Ltd. The Tribunal's ruling favored the assessee, permitting them to utilize Cenvat Credit for paying service tax on GTA services. Issue 3: Validity of penalty under section 76 of the Act: The Commissioner had imposed a penalty under section 76 of the Act on the assessee. However, the Tribunal's decision in favor of the assessee in allowing the use of Cenvat Credit for service tax payment on GTA services also impacted the penalty issue. As the Tribunal upheld the assessee's right to utilize Cenvat Credit for such payments, the penalty imposed by the Commissioner was not sustained. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal and rejected the Revenue's appeal, thereby resolving the issue of penalty under section 76 of the Act in favor of the assessee. This detailed analysis of the judgment provides a comprehensive overview of the legal issues involved, the arguments presented by both parties, and the Tribunal's decision based on legal interpretations and precedents.
|
