2019 (4) TMI 588 - AT - Service Tax

CENVAT Credit - duty paying documents - Credit has been taken by the appellant based on Bank slip - whether prescribed document in terms of Rule 4A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 read with Rule 9 (1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 or not? - Held that - Since the substantial requirement regarding receipt of taxable service and payment of service tax amount to the service provider has been complied with; CENVAT Credit cannot be denied on mere technicalities that is Bank Slip dated 05.03.2011 issued by the Bank cannot be considered as proper document - there are no merits in the impugned order, so far as it denied CENVAT benefit on Banking services to the appellant - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues: Denial of Cenvat benefit of service tax paid on Banking Services based on the use of Bank slip as a prescribed document.

Analysis:
The key issue in this case revolves around the denial of Cenvat benefit of service tax paid on Banking Services due to the use of a Bank slip as the prescribed document. The Revenue contended that the CENVAT Credit was taken by the appellant based on a Bank slip, which they argued cannot be considered a prescribed document as per Rule 4A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 read with Rule 9(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. However, upon examination, it was found that the appellant had mentioned a disputed amount in the appeal memorandum that did not match the amount shown in the Summary of Bank charges. The discrepancy was pointed out, and the appellant corrected the mistake by acknowledging the correct figure. The Tribunal considered the submissions of the appellant in this regard.

Further analysis reveals that the appellant had provided a certification from the State Bank of India dated 05.03.2011, which reflected the amount of service charges along with the service tax. Additionally, the appellant produced a bank statement showing the debiting of the entire amounts of taxable services from its current account. The Tribunal noted that the substantial requirement regarding the receipt of taxable service and payment of service tax amount to the service provider had been fulfilled by the appellant. The Tribunal emphasized that CENVAT Credit cannot be denied on mere technicalities, such as considering a Bank slip as an improper document.

In conclusion, the Tribunal did not find any merits in the impugned order that denied CENVAT benefit on Banking services to the appellant. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant. This judgment highlights the importance of substantial compliance with tax requirements and emphasizes that technicalities should not be used to deny legitimate benefits to taxpayers.