2020 (2) TMI 757 - AT - Service Tax

CENVAT Credit - whether the appellant are required to reverse the Cenvat credit availed during the period when output services (construction) was taxable up to the date of Building Completion Certificate (BCC), since the input services were availed to construct the entire property but after the BCC, the portion of such property did not attract Service Tax? - HELD THAT - The issue involved is mixed question of law and facts - Since the question is mixed question of law and facts and after evolution of law on the subject matter, the matter needs to be reconsidered. Matter remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for passing a fresh order - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues involved: Whether appellant is required to reverse Cenvat credit availed during the period when output services were taxable up to the date of Building Completion Certificate (BCC).

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad, delivered by Hon'ble Member (Judicial) Mr. Ramesh Nair and Hon'ble Member (Technical) Mr. Raju, dealt with the issue of reversing Cenvat credit availed by the appellant during a period when output services (construction) were taxable until the issuance of the Building Completion Certificate (BCC). The appellant contended that the issue was covered by various judgments, including Alembic Ltd. Vs CCE 2019 (28) GSTL 71 (T) and Principal Commissioner vs. Alembic Ltd. 2019 (7) TMI 908-Gujarat HC. On the other hand, the Learned Assistant Commissioner representing the Revenue reiterated the findings of the impugned order.

Upon hearing both parties and examining the records, the Tribunal found that the issue at hand involved a mixed question of law and facts. The Tribunal noted that subsequent judgments by the Tribunal and the Gujarat High Court had been passed on similar issues after the impugned order. Considering the evolution of law on the subject matter and the need to reconsider the matter in light of the new judgments and the specific facts of the case, the Tribunal decided to set aside the impugned order. The Tribunal remanded the matter to the Adjudicating Authority for a fresh order, taking into account the observations made by the Tribunal. The appeal was allowed by way of remand to the Adjudicating Authority.

In conclusion, the judgment highlighted the complexity of the issue, which required a fresh consideration in light of the evolving legal landscape and specific factual circumstances. The decision to remand the matter to the Adjudicating Authority aimed at ensuring a comprehensive review based on the latest legal interpretations and case law developments.