2015 (10) TMI 1353 - AT - Central Excise

Denial of CENVAT Credit - cellular services, insurance premium of vehicles used by their employees and by the company - Failure to produce relevant documents - Held that - It is seen that after personal hearing, the appellant had indeed submitted the said evidence and the same could not be considered while passing the order. The appellants produced a copy of their letter dated 02/06/2010 wherein they have submitted the bills of telephone and insurance papers. The same have not been considered in the order. - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues: Denial of Cenvat Credit on service tax paid on cellular services, insurance premium of vehicles, individual health, and accident policy.

Analysis:
1. The Commissioner (Appeals) denied the Cenvat Credit, stating the appellants failed to provide evidence supporting their claim, despite acknowledging that certain taxes need to be credited. The Hon'ble CESTAT case of Force Motors Ltd. was cited, emphasizing the need for documentary proof to ascertain the use of services in relation to manufactured products or output services.

2. The appellant argued that their case aligns with the decision in the Muscat Polymers Pvt. Ltd. case and submitted evidence post personal hearing to support their claim. However, the learned AR reiterated the findings of the appeal memorandum.

3. The primary reason for denying credit was the lack of relevant documents supporting the use of services in manufacturing final products or output services. The appellant had submitted evidence post personal hearing, including telephone bills and insurance papers, which were not considered in the order.

4. Consequently, the appeal was allowed by way of remand for the Commissioner (Appeals) to reconsider the evidence provided by the appellants, ensuring adherence to the principles of natural justice. The decision highlighted the importance of considering all relevant evidence before making a final determination.