2012 (5) TMI 220 - AT - Service Tax

CENVAT Credit availed on input services - appellants submitted that the original documents could not be produced since the factory had been attached by GIDC and therefore the impugned order has been passed holding that the appellant could not produce the original documents, on the basis of which credit has been taken. - matter remanded for verification.

Summary

Issues:
1. Failure to produce original documents for availed credit on input services.
2. Imposition of demand, interest, and penalty under CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Failure to produce original documents for availed credit on input services
The appellant, engaged in manufacturing dye-stuffs, was requested to produce documents/invoices for input services amounting to Rs.4,94,061. Despite repeated reminders, the appellant did not submit the documents. The impugned order held that the appellant failed to produce the original documents, leading to the confirmation of the demand. The appellant's counsel explained that the original documents were unavailable due to the factory being attached by GIDC. However, the appellant later obtained the original documents and requested a remand to demonstrate that the credit was rightfully taken based on these documents. The appellant also deposited the entire amount of CENVAT Credit demanded, indicating cooperation and willingness to resolve the issue.

Issue 2: Imposition of demand, interest, and penalty under CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004
Given that the entire demand amount was deposited and the appellant now possessed the original documents, both parties consented to the appeal being taken up for final disposal. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the original adjudicating authority. The authority was instructed to reexamine the issue, providing the appellant with a reasonable opportunity to produce the relevant documents. This decision reflects a fair approach, allowing the appellant to rectify the deficiency in document submission and ensuring a thorough review of the case based on the newly available evidence.

In conclusion, the judgment focused on the failure to produce original documents for availed credit on input services and the subsequent imposition of demand, interest, and penalty under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The Tribunal's decision to remand the matter for reevaluation with the newly obtained original documents demonstrates a commitment to fairness and due process while upholding the principles of tax compliance and documentation requirements in the context of CENVAT credit availed by the appellant.