2014 (2) TMI 337 - AT - Service Tax

Waiver of pre-deposit - Ineligible cenvat credit availed - Wharfage - Held that - appellant is also not able to produce any document regarding the credit availed of service tax paid of an amount of approximately Rs. 2 Lakhs - appellant is not eligible for Cenvat credit of service tax paid on Wharfage charges due to insufficiency of the evidences - appellant has not made out a prima facie case for complete waiver of the amounts involved - Conditional stay granted.

Summary

Issues:
- Waiver of pre-deposit of confirmed duty, interest, and penalty for ineligible cenvat credit availed.
- Eligibility of appellant for Cenvat credit of service tax paid on Wharfage charges based on evidence presented.

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD, delivered by Mr. M.V. Ravindran, addressed the issue of waiver of pre-deposit of Rs. 14,51,923/- confirmed as duty, interest, and penalty for ineligible cenvat credit availed by the appellant. The adjudicating authority had confirmed the amounts as ineligible cenvat credit, citing that the documents used by the appellant did not provide correct details to qualify for cenvat credit. The appellant had availed cenvat credit of service tax charged on 'Wharfage' by M/s. Gujarat Maritime Board to specific companies, but the documents attached to the appeal memoranda lacked crucial information. These documents did not include service tax registration numbers or evidence of payment of service tax on 'Wharfage.' Additionally, the appellant failed to produce documentation regarding the credit availed of service tax paid amounting to approximately Rs. 2 Lakhs. As a result, the tribunal found insufficient evidence to conclude that the appellant was eligible for Cenvat credit of service tax paid on Wharfage charges.

Furthermore, the tribunal highlighted that despite multiple hearing dates and requests for adjournment to produce additional documents, the appellant failed to establish a prima facie case for a complete waiver of the amounts involved. Consequently, the tribunal directed the appellant to deposit a partial amount of Rs. 6,00,000/- within eight weeks and report compliance. The compliance report was to be submitted to the Deputy Registrar, who would then present the file before the bench for further orders. Upon verification of compliance, the application for the waiver of pre-deposit of the remaining balance amounts was allowed, and recovery was stayed pending the appeal's disposal. The judgment emphasized the importance of providing sufficient evidence to support the eligibility for cenvat credit and the procedural requirements for seeking a waiver of pre-deposit in such cases.