9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (2) TMI 495 - HC - Central ExciseCENVAT credit availed and distributed by the respondent prior to getting registered as an input service Distributor - penalty under erstwhile Rule 15(4) of the CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 - CHA Services - services availed after the goods has been cleared from the place of removal. CENVAT credit availed and distributed by the respondent prior to getting registered as an input service Distributor under the Act - penalty under erstwhile Rule 15(4) of the CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 - HELD THAT - The issue has already been decided in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE VERSUS DASHION LTD 2016 (2) TMI 183 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT where it was held that It is true that the Government had framed Rules of 2005 for registration of input service distributors who would have to make application to the jurisdictional Superintendent of Central Excise in terms of Rule 3 thereof. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 3 further required any provider of taxable service whose aggregate value of taxable service exceeds certain limit to make an application for registration within the time prescribed. However there is nothing in the said Rules of 2005 or in the Rules of 2004 which would automatically and without any additional reasons dis-entitle an input service distributor from availing Cenvat credit unless and until such registration was applied and granted. The decision has been accepted by the Central Board of Excise and Customs vide Circular dated 16.02.2018. Therefore the questions have to be decided against the Revenue and accordingly decided so. CENVAT Credit - CHA Services - services availed after the goods has been cleared from the place of removal - HELD THAT - There were no material facts and evidences available on record on this aspect as to whether this CHA services rendered to the assessee could also be availed for the purpose of CENVAT credit. Therefore the Tribunal has granted relief to the assessee. Hence we are of the considered view that there is no substantial question of law arises for consideration on this issue viz. with regard to allowing CENVAT credit on CHA services and therefore we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal. Appeal dismissed.
Issues:
1. Allowance of CENVAT credit prior to registration as an input service distributor. 2. Imposition of penalty under Rule 15(4) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. 3. Allowance of CENVAT credit on Customs House Agents (CHA) services post-clearance. Analysis: Issue 1: The appellant challenged the Tribunal's decision to allow CENVAT credit availed before registration as an input service distributor. The Court referred to a previous decision and a Circular by the Central Board of Excise and Customs, stating that registration was not a prerequisite to avail CENVAT credit. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision against the Revenue. Issue 2: Regarding the penalty under Rule 15(4) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, the Court relied on the same previous decision and Circular, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal. The Court decided in favor of the assessee based on the procedural irregularity and the availability of records for verification. Issue 3: The controversy over allowing CENVAT credit on CHA services post-clearance was debated. The appellant argued against it, citing precedents and legal definitions. The respondent's counsel referred to a Circular clarifying the concept of "place of removal." The Court found insufficient evidence on record to determine the eligibility for CENVAT credit on CHA services. Consequently, the Tribunal's decision to grant relief to the assessee was upheld, leaving the substantial question of law open for future consideration. In conclusion, the Court dismissed the appeal, answering substantial questions of law 1 and 2 against the Revenue and in favor of the assessee. The third issue was left open due to the lack of material evidence. No costs were awarded in the judgment.
|
