2024 (3) TMI 233 - AT - Service Tax

CENVAT Credit - denial merely on the fact that the invoices were raised in the name of the registered office - HELD THAT - The Commissioner (Appeals) Order makes it clear that Cenvat Credit is required to be allowed - However, it is found that he has still allowed the Department s Appeal on the ground that evidence was not brought in by the Appellant towards the premises in question. The Learned Chartered Accountant submits a copy of the Trade Licence issued by Kolkata Municipal Corporation showing the premises at 29, Ganesh Chandra Avenue, Kolkata-13 as the office of the present Appellant, M/s Shyam Sel And Power Ltd. Therefore, the impugned order is legally not sustainable and set aside the same. Appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in this case are related to the denial of Cenvat Credit for input services due to invoices raised in the name of an unregistered office, and the requirement of evidence regarding the ownership of the premises in question.

Refund of Input Services:
The Appellant had claimed a refund for input services under Notification No. 41/2012-ST. The Adjudicating Authority sanctioned a partial refund, which led to a Revenue appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) challenging the sanctioning of a specific amount. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue based on the absence of evidence regarding the ownership of the premises where the invoices were addressed. The Appellant, aggrieved by this decision, approached the Tribunal.

Denial of Cenvat Credit:
The Appellant's Chartered Accountant argued that Cenvat Credit cannot be denied solely based on invoices being raised in the name of the registered office. The Commissioner (Appeals) acknowledged this but still allowed the Revenue's appeal due to the lack of evidence regarding the ownership of the premises. The Appellant contended that they were not given a proper opportunity to provide the necessary documents, leading to the request for setting aside the order.

Legal Analysis and Decision:
Upon review, the Tribunal found that the denial of Cenvat Credit solely on the grounds of invoices being in the name of an unregistered office was unjustified. Citing relevant case law, the Tribunal emphasized that as long as the Service tax liability is discharged from the registered premises, Cenvat Credit should not be denied. The Tribunal also noted that the Credit Rules do not mandate registration with the Department for availing Cenvat Credit. The Appellant submitted a Trade Licence issued by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation, confirming the premises in question as their office. Consequently, the Tribunal held that the impugned order was legally unsustainable and set it aside, allowing the appeal with any consequential relief as per law.