2018 (6) TMI 643 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT credit - denial for the reason that the original invoices are not produced - Service Tax Registration Nos. of the service providers are not available in the invoices - CENVAT credit availed on Outdoor Catering Service was ineligible - Held that - Appellant will furnish all the original invoices to the satisfaction of the Ld. AA - the matter on this issue is required to be re-adjudicated by the adjudicating authority and hence, the appeal is remanded to the file of the adjudicating authority for verification of balance invoices, to his satisfaction - appeal allowed by way of remand. CENVAT credit - denial on the ground that some of the invoices did not contain the Service tax Registration number of the service provider - Held that - During the course of hearing the Ld. Advocate for the appellant submitted that the assessee-appellant was not put on notice i.e., this point was never alleged in the SCN and, therefore, the impugned order has travelled beyond the scope of the SCN - the denial is thus not as per law and the Cenvat credit needs to be allowed in favour of the assessee - denial of credit set aside. Denial of CENVAT credit on the outdoor catering service - Held that - Ld. Counsel submitted that the assessee-appellant was not put on notice i.e., this point was never alleged in the SCN and therefore, the impugned order has travelled beyond the scope of the SCN - decided in favor of assessee. CENVAT credit - civil works - rent a cab service - Held that - It is argued that the said services pertain to general repair and maintenance carried out in a plant premises which did not involve civil works. However, this factual aspect requires verification and therefore for this limited issue of verification, this ground is remanded back to the file of the adjudicating authority to decide afresh after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Liability of interest and penalty - Held that - There is no deliberate breach of law and that it was a bonafide act because of some inadvertent mistakes - no interest and penalty could be levied. Appeal allowed in part.

Summary

Issues Involved:
- Denial of Cenvat credit due to missing original invoices
- Absence of Service Tax Registration Nos. on invoices
- Ineligibility of Cenvat credit for "Outdoor Catering Service"

Denial of Cenvat Credit Due to Missing Original Invoices:
The appellant, a manufacturer of beverages, faced a demand of ?15,32,066 for allegedly availing Cenvat credit based on photocopies of invoices. The appellant argued that original invoices were stored off-site for convenience but offered to produce them. The Revenue cited a Mumbai Tribunal case supporting their stance. The Tribunal remanded the issue to verify remaining invoices and directed the appellant to furnish originals for re-adjudication.

Absence of Service Tax Registration Nos. on Invoices:
The appellant contested the denial of Cenvat credit due to missing service provider registration numbers, claiming lack of prior notice on this issue. Citing legal precedents, the Tribunal held that demands based on unnotified grounds in show cause notices are unsustainable. Consequently, the denial of credit was set aside following established legal principles.

Ineligibility of Cenvat Credit for "Outdoor Catering Service":
The appellant also challenged the denial of Cenvat credit for outdoor catering services, arguing lack of prior notice in the show cause notice. Relying on legal arguments, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing that issues beyond the scope of the notice cannot be sustained. As a result, the denial of credit for outdoor catering services was overturned.

Verification of Credit for Civil Works and Rent a Cab Service:
Regarding credit availed on civil works and rent a cab service, the appellant voluntarily reversed the credit and paid interest. The Tribunal remanded this issue for verification, emphasizing the need for a factual assessment by the adjudicating authority to determine the eligibility of credit based on repair and maintenance activities.

Interest and Penalty Imposition:
The appellant contended that no interest or penalty should be imposed due to inadvertent errors. The Tribunal acknowledged the lack of deliberate violation and deemed the actions as bona fide. Consequently, no interest or penalty was levied on the appellant.

In conclusion, all three appeals were partly allowed based on the above considerations, with the Tribunal emphasizing adherence to legal principles and procedural fairness throughout the adjudication process.