2015 (12) TMI 1309 - AT - Central Excise

Denial of CENVAT credit - Construction Service and Sponsorship Services - nexus with output service - Held that - Appellant was registered with the Service Tax authorities having Registration No AADCC6772BST003. The Learned Advocate placed the copy of the Service Tax Registration certificate. The appellant also drew the attention of the invoices issued by them as Service Provider indicating the Service Tax Code Number. It is evident from the record that the appellant was registered with the Service Tax authorities. - appellant placed the Service Tax registration certificate as well as the Service Tax Code Number as mentioned in the invoices before the lower authorities. Hence, there was no reason to remand the matter. In any event, there is no need to say that if the documents filed by the appellants are not legal, the appellant would be deprived from the benefit of this order. - Impugned order cannot sustained - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Denial of Cenvat Credit on Input Service for manufacturing excisable goods and providing output services.
2. Registration status under Central Excise and Service Tax authorities.
3. Validity of Service Tax registration certificate and code number.
4. Remand of the matter for further examination by the Adjudicating authority.
5. Decision on the sustainability of the impugned orders.

Analysis:
1. The judgment revolves around the denial of Cenvat Credit on Input Service for manufacturing excisable goods and providing output services. The appellants were engaged in manufacturing excisable goods and offering Construction Service and Sponsorship Services. Two show cause notices were issued to deny the credit on the Input Service, alleging its non-use in the output service.

2. The Commissioner (Appeals) noted that the appellant was registered with the Central Excise Authorities but not with the Service Tax authorities as a service provider. It was contended that without registration under the Service Tax Act, the appellants were ineligible to avail the credit on the input service used in manufacturing finished products.

3. The appellant presented evidence of being registered with the Service Tax authorities, providing the Registration No. AADCC6772BST003 and submitting relevant documents like the Service Tax registration certificate and invoices with the Service Tax Code Number. The Adjudicating authority was urged to consider these documents, with the Revenue representative suggesting a remand for further examination.

4. The Hon'ble Member (Judicial) found the appellant's submission of the Service Tax registration certificate and Code Number sufficient, negating the need for a remand. Emphasizing that the appellant should not be deprived of benefits if the documents were legally sound, the judgment favored the appellant's position.

5. Ultimately, the impugned orders were deemed unsustainable, leading to their setting aside. Both appeals filed by the appellants were allowed, indicating a favorable outcome for the appellants based on the evidence presented and the lack of necessity for a remand.