2010 (2) TMI 415 - AT - Service Tax

Stay Cenvat Credit - The demand is confirmed on the ground that the applicants had wrongly availed the credit on the strength of documents issued for their branches at Head office and the same has been wrongly utilized for payment of S. Tax. Held that - the Head office at Kolkata was allowed to collect and pay service tax of their branch offices therefore prima facie the applicants have a strong case in their favour therefore the pre deposit of duty and penalties are waived.

Summary

Issues:
1. Waiver of pre-deposit of Service Tax, interest, and penalties.
2. Availment of credit on the strength of documents issued for branches at Head office.
3. Dispute regarding centralized billing and collection of Service Tax.
4. Denial of credit due to lack of centralized register.
5. Validity of permission granted by Assistant Commissioner for collection and payment of Service Tax.
6. Decision on pre-deposit of duty and penalties.

Analysis:
1. The applicant sought a waiver of pre-deposit of Service Tax amounting to Rs.19,40,220, along with interest and penalties. The demand was confirmed based on the allegation that the applicant wrongly availed credit using documents issued for their branches at the Head office, which were then utilized for Service Tax payment.

2. The applicant contended that in 1997, the Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner permitted centralized billing for all branches and site offices, authorizing the Head office to collect and pay Service Tax on behalf of all locations. The credit was availed based on Service Tax paid by branches at the Head office, with no dispute on credit eligibility. The Revenue objected, citing the absence of a centralized register as grounds for denying the credit.

3. The Revenue argued that the credit was taken using documents from branch offices not compliant with Service Tax provisions due to the lack of centralized registration. However, the applicant maintained that the Assistant Commissioner's authorization letter dated 4/9/97 allowed the Head office to handle Service Tax for branch offices, making the demand unsustainable.

4. Considering the permission granted by the Assistant Commissioner for the collection and payment of Service Tax by the Head office on behalf of branch offices, the Tribunal found a strong case in favor of the applicant. As a result, the pre-deposit of duty and penalties were waived, and the recovery stayed during the appeal process, indicating a favorable outcome for the applicant.