2013 (5) TMI 210 - AT - Central Excise

Waiver of pre-deposit - Revenue submits that amount of ineligible Cenvat credit availed by the appellant on the service tax paid by CHA, Port and the Transporters, who provided the services in respect of the goods which were exported by the appellant.- Held that - There are various decisions of this Bench which settled the law that credit of such service tax paid by service providers is allowed to the assessee. Since the issue is more or less settled, impugned order set-aside appeal is allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues: Stay petition for waiver of pre-deposit of confirmed ineligible Cenvat credit on service tax paid by CHA, Port, and Transporters for exported goods.

Analysis:
1. The stay petition was filed seeking waiver of pre-deposit of the confirmed amounts of ineligible Cenvat credit on service tax paid by CHA, Port, and Transporters for services related to exported goods. The lower authorities confirmed the amounts as ineligible Cenvat credit availed by the appellant.

2. The Tribunal noted that the appeal could be disposed of at that stage since the first appellate authority had not given any findings on the merits of the case but dismissed the appeal due to non-compliance with the pre-deposit order. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the application for waiver of pre-deposit and decided to take up the appeal for disposal.

3. The main issue in the case revolved around the Cenvat credit of service tax paid by service providers like CHA, Port, authorized persons by the Port, transporters of goods, and insurance services related to export of goods. The Tribunal referred to previous decisions by the Bench that established the allowance of such service tax credit to the assessee. Given the settled nature of the issue, the Tribunal found it necessary to set aside the impugned order. However, the Tribunal refrained from delving into the merits of the case as the first appellate authority had not provided any findings on the same.

4. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal by remanding it back to the first appellate authority for a fresh consideration of the issue without requiring any pre-deposit from the appellant. The Tribunal emphasized that the first appellate authority must adhere to the principles of natural justice before reaching a conclusion.

5. In conclusion, the appeal was allowed by way of remand, directing the first appellate authority to reexamine the issue afresh in compliance with principles of natural justice, without insisting on any pre-deposit from the appellant.