2014 (7) TMI 241 - AT - Service Tax

Waiver of pre deposit - CENVAT Credit - input services - port services - Held that - On the amount of ₹ 11.31 Crores confirmed by the adjudicating authority, appellant has relied upon the case laws mentioned in Para 2 above wherein Royalty charges, Renting of immovable property in Port area etc have been held to be not covered within the scope of port services during the relevant period. Appellant has, prima facie , made out a case of complete waiver of demand with respect to the port services. deposits, already made by the appellant and appropriated by the adjudicating authority, are enough deposit to grant stay on recoveries of the remaining amounts. - Stay granted.

Summary

Issues:
Stay application against OIO confirming Service Tax demand and denying CENVAT Credit.

Analysis:
The appellant filed a stay application against OIO No.122/COMMR/2013 confirming a demand of &8377; 14,65,29,248/- for not paying Service Tax and denying CENVAT Credit of &8377; 14,62,512/-. The adjudicating authority also ordered payment of interest and imposed penalties under the Finance Act, 1994 and CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The appellant paid partial amounts during the proceedings. The appellant argued that charges like Cargo Handling & Storage, Royalty for containers, and others under 'Port Services' were not covered within the definition of 'Port services' based on case laws cited. Regarding the disallowance of CENVAT Credit on input services, the appellant relied on case laws to support the admissibility of the credit. The Revenue defended the order, arguing that the input services had no nexus with the services provided by the appellant, citing case laws in support.

The Tribunal considered the arguments and case laws presented by both sides. Regarding the &8377; 11.31 Crores demand confirmed by the adjudicating authority, the appellant's reliance on case laws to show that certain charges were not covered under 'Port services' was noted. A prima facie case for a complete waiver of demand related to port services was acknowledged. On the issue of CENVAT Credit on input services, both parties presented their arguments supported by case laws. Given the contentious nature of the issues, the Tribunal found that the deposits already made by the appellant were sufficient to grant a stay on the remaining recoveries. Therefore, the Tribunal ordered a stay on the recoveries of the outstanding dues and penalties until the appeal's disposal. The judgment was pronounced on 11.3.2014 by H K Thakur.