2017 (3) TMI 562 - AT - Service Tax

CENVAT credit - input services written off - out of pocket expenses, later written off as bed debt - whether the appellants are eligible to CENVAT credit of the service tax paid on the value of service, namely, out of pocket expenses shown in their bill along with professional fees, but not reimbursed by the receiver of the service and later written off from their books of account being bad debt? - Held that - Rule 3(5B) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 reveals that it is directed against the input or capital goods and not applicable to the input services, therefore, recovery proceeding initiated by Revenue on the credit attributable to the written off of value of the input service from the books of accounts, being bad debt cannot be sustained - credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
- Appellate challenge against Order-in-Appeal
- Availment of CENVAT credit on input services
- Interpretation of Rule 3(5B) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004

Appellate Challenge Against Order-in-Appeal:
The appeal was filed against the Order-in-Appeal No.AHM-SVTAX-000-APP-181-14-15 dated 29.12.2014 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals II), Central Excise, Ahmedabad. The appellants, engaged in providing output services, availed CENVAT credit on various input services used in providing output services. The dispute arose when a show cause notice was issued, alleging wrongful availment of CENVAT credit of ?5,64,501/- during the period 2008-09. The demand was confirmed with interest and penalty, leading to the appeal before the Tribunal.

Availment of CENVAT Credit on Input Services:
The appellants, in providing Chartered Accountant services, billed out of pocket expenses along with professional fees. However, at times, clients did not pay these expenses, leading to accumulation and subsequent write-off by the appellants as bad debt. The issue revolved around whether the appellants were eligible for CENVAT credit on the service tax paid on such unreimbursed expenses. The Revenue relied on Rule 3(5B) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, which pertains to the written off value of input or capital goods. The appellants argued that this Rule does not apply to input services, citing a Tribunal decision in support of their contention.

Interpretation of Rule 3(5B) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004:
The Tribunal analyzed Rule 3(5B) and concluded that it is directed against 'input' or 'capital goods' and does not apply to input services. The Rule mandates payment if the value of input or capital goods on which CENVAT credit was taken is written off fully or partially. The Tribunal referred to a previous judgment where it was held that there is no statutory mandate to reverse CENVAT credit on output services when consideration is not realized and written off as bad debt. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order and providing consequential relief as per law.