2019 (2) TMI 1383 - AT - Service Tax

CENVAT Credit - the assessee had not furnished the cenvat return or abstract or details of the cenvat credit availed, also had not furnished the duty paying documents - statements of service provider - Original Invoices - Rule 9 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (CCR) - Held that - It is a self-contained document incorporating all the mandatory requirements of proviso to Rule 4A and in any case, NPCI is not a private body just to ignore its statement; as to the nature of service, there is an agreement in place - It is not the case of the Revenue that NPCI has not filed its ST-3 return or that there was any contravention by NPCI whereby a doubt is entertained as to the transactions, to deny cenvat credit availed by the assessee on its payment to NPCI - Hence, we are unable to subscribe to the views of the Ld. Commissioner and hence, we are setting aside the same. Cenvat on statements of service provider - Held that - The service providers include private parties which is not as per Rule 9 (2) of CCR, 2004 read with Rule 4A of Service Tax Rules, 1994, lacking even the minimum necessary details. There is no whisper about any agreement with the parties, but, however, considering the fact that the assessee is a banker, we find it appropriate to give one more opportunity to prove its case, by producing bills/invoices and not just invoice of invoices. The assessee should co-operate with the Revenue and it cannot claim any special status by filing appropriate documents. Cenvat on Original Invoices - Held that - The assessee has furnished the photocopies of the invoices and it is the settled legal position of law that even photocopies of invoices are the valid documents - Denial of cenvat credit on the photocopy of the invoices is not justified and hence the same is set aside. Cenvat Credit where no documents furnished - Held that - No documents were furnished - we do not propose to interfere with the findings of the lower authority. Appeal allowed in part.

Summary

Issues:
1. Availment of input service tax credit and capital goods cenvat credit without proper documentation.
2. Discrepancies in filing cenvat credit returns and furnishing duty paying documents.
3. Adjudication on the eligibility of cenvat credit availed by the appellant.
4. Disallowance of cenvat credit on e-statement of NPCI.
5. Disallowance of cenvat credit on statements of service providers.
6. Disallowance of cenvat credit for lack of original invoices.

Issue 1: Availment of Credit without Proper Documentation
The Show Cause Notice alleged that the appellant availed input service tax credit and capital goods cenvat credit without furnishing necessary documents as required by Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The appellant contended that they had filed the required returns and documents based on cenvat documents and had rectified clerical errors in credit quantification. The Adjudicating Authority confirmed the appellant's eligibility for a portion of the credit but disallowed the balance due to lack of proper documentation.

Issue 2: Discrepancies in Filing Returns and Furnishing Documents
The Commissioner held that the appellant failed to file cenvat credit returns as per the specified form and did not furnish necessary documents for verification, leading to an inordinate delay. The Authority confirmed the eligibility of a specific credit amount but disallowed the balance as ineligible due to non-compliance with documentation requirements.

Issue 3: Adjudication on Eligibility of Cenvat Credit
The Adjudicating Authority confirmed the eligibility of a substantial credit amount availed by the appellant but disallowed a portion as ineligible due to documentation issues. The appellant challenged this decision in the appeal.

Issue 4: Disallowance of Cenvat Credit on NPCI E-Statement
Regarding the cenvat credit availed on the e-statement issued by NPCI for ATM transactions, the Tribunal found that NPCI provided essential services to member banks, and the e-statement contained all required information as per Rule 4A of Service Tax Rules, 1994. The Tribunal set aside the disallowance of this credit.

Issue 5: Disallowance of Cenvat Credit on Service Providers' Statements
The Tribunal noted that the appellant failed to produce invoices from private service providers, contrary to Rule 9(2) of CCR, 2004. However, considering the appellant's status as a banker, they were given an opportunity to provide proper documentation to support their claim.

Issue 6: Disallowance of Cenvat Credit for Lack of Original Invoices
The Tribunal held that photocopies of invoices are valid documents, citing relevant case laws, and set aside the disallowance of cenvat credit based on photocopies. However, for the balance of cenvat credit where no documents were furnished, the Tribunal upheld the lower authority's decision.

In conclusion, the Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, setting aside the disallowance of cenvat credit on NPCI e-statement and photocopies of invoices, while providing the appellant with an opportunity to submit proper documentation for credit from service providers.