2018 (12) TMI 659 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT Credit - input services at their head office i.e. place where the factory is also situated - Held that - Appellant has submitted that before the adjudicating authority they could not produce the relevant evidences in support of their claim that the credit has been availed at their head office wherefrom centralized billing was undertaken even though services were rendered from various other locations - it is prudent to remand the matter back to the adjudicating authority to re-assess the evidences in the light of the claim of the appellant that they had a centralized billing/ accounting system at the places where they have availed the credit on various input services used in or in relation to manufacture of goods taking into consideration the principles of law - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues: Availment of CENVAT Credit on input services at the head office.

Analysis:
1. The appellants, engaged in manufacturing excisable goods, availed CENVAT Credit on input services at their head office. The issue was whether this credit availed at the head office, where centralized billing was conducted, could be utilized for services provided from various locations. The Revenue contended that since each location had separate registration, credit could not be availed at the head office alone.

2. The appellants argued that they were unable to produce all relevant documents supporting their claim before the adjudicating authority. They requested an opportunity to submit these documents to prove that the credit on input services had been correctly availed at the head office. The Revenue did not object to remanding the case but suggested fixing a time frame for further proceedings.

3. The Tribunal considered the submissions from both parties. It was decided to remand the matter back to the adjudicating authority for reassessment. The authority was instructed to review the evidence in light of the appellant's claim of centralized billing system at locations where credit on input services was availed. The decision was made to allow the appeals by way of remand, keeping all issues open. The Revenue's request for a fixed time frame for the new proceedings was granted, with a directive for completion within four months from the order's communication. The appellant was instructed to cooperate and avoid unnecessary delays.

4. Ultimately, the appeals were allowed by way of remand, with the operative portion of the order pronounced in court. The decision highlighted the need for a thorough reassessment of the evidence regarding the availment of CENVAT Credit on input services at the head office, emphasizing the importance of centralized billing and accounting systems in the process.