2009 (12) TMI 426 - AT - Service Tax

Stay Cenvat Credit -The denial of Cenvat credit on the said service is on the ground that the appellant has taken Service tax registration only in the month of May, 2006 and any Service tax paid post registration are only eligible for the Service tax credit. Held that service tax credit not to be held as ineligible for payment of Service Tax for March and April 2006 after registration. Prima facie case made out for pre deposit waiver.

Summary

Issues:
Waiver of pre-deposit of Cenvat Credit amounts, Penalty under sections 76 and 15(3).

Analysis:
The appellant filed a stay petition seeking waiver of pre-deposit of Cenvat Credit amounts and penalties under sections 76 and 15(3). The Chartered Accountant argued that the Cenvat credit disallowed was on Service tax paid for March and April 2006, after registration in May 2006. The denial was based on the timing of Service tax registration. The DR supported the adjudicating authority's decision. The Tribunal noted that the appellant had started discharging Service tax liability for March and April 2006 after registration, making a case for eligibility of Service tax credit on input services. The Tribunal found in favor of the appellant, allowing the waiver of pre-deposit and staying recovery until the appeal's disposal. The decision was pronounced and dictated in open court by the Tribunal.

This judgment addressed the issue of eligibility for Cenvat Credit on Service tax paid for specific months concerning the timing of registration. The Tribunal considered the submissions from both sides and concluded that the appellant was entitled to the Service tax credit for input services despite the registration timing. The decision highlighted the importance of the appellant's compliance with Service tax liability post-registration in determining eligibility for the credit.

The Tribunal's analysis focused on the interpretation of the relevant provisions regarding Cenvat Credit eligibility and the timing of Service tax registration. By examining the appellant's compliance with Service tax liability for the relevant period, the Tribunal determined that the denial of Cenvat Credit based on registration timing was incorrect. The decision emphasized the appellant's actions in discharging Service tax liability after registration, leading to the allowance of waiver of pre-deposit and stay on recovery pending appeal disposal.

In conclusion, the judgment provided clarity on the eligibility of Cenvat Credit concerning Service tax payment timing and registration. The Tribunal's decision to allow the waiver of pre-deposit and stay on recovery highlighted the importance of compliance post-registration in determining entitlement to the credit. The analysis underscored the Tribunal's role in interpreting and applying relevant legal provisions to ensure fair treatment for appellants in tax matters.