2018 (8) TMI 398 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT Credit - GTA Services - credit for the period prior to 01.04.2008 - benefit of Circular No. 97/8/2007-ST dated 23.08.2007 - Held that - This issue has been settled by the decision of the Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Commr. v. ABB Ltd. 2011 (3) TMI 248 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT , where it has been held that the benefit of Circular No. 97/8/2007-ST dated 23.08.2007 was valid till 01.04.2008 - the credit availed by the appellant prior to 01.04.2008, is eligible - appeal allowed in part.

Summary

Issues:
1. Denovo adjudication order confirming irregularly availed CENVAT Credit on transportation.
2. Appellant's contention of having paid service tax to GTAs and department's knowledge of credit availed.
3. Tribunal's remand for fresh adjudication.
4. Applicability of Circular No. 97/8/2007-ST and judicial precedents on CENVAT Credit eligibility.

Analysis:
1. The Tribunal remanded the matter for denovo adjudication after the Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand of irregularly availed CENVAT Credit on inward and outward transportation. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order, leading to the present appeal challenging the decision.

2. The appellant argued that it had paid service tax to GTAs as per bills and had consistently disclosed the credit availed in statutory returns. The appellant contended that the department was aware of the credit being availed, emphasizing compliance with tax payment obligations.

3. The Tribunal referred to its earlier order, directing the lower adjudicating authority to reexamine the issue of CENVAT Credit on GTA service. The Tribunal emphasized the need for proper examination of documents submitted by the appellant and granted both parties the opportunity to present supporting documents.

4. The Tribunal considered the applicability of Circular No. 97/8/2007-ST and cited judicial precedents to determine the eligibility of CENVAT Credit. Referring to decisions of various High Courts and the Supreme Court, the Tribunal concluded that the credit availed by the appellant before April 1, 2008, was valid. Relying on the Supreme Court's ruling in a specific case, the Tribunal modified the impugned order, partially allowing the appeal based on the eligibility of credit prior to the specified date.