2010 (12) TMI 342

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f would not be justification to deny the benefit of Cenvat credit to the service recipient in relation to such service tax paid on invoices issued by the service provider and when in fact entire duty has already been discharged by the service provider - Hence, prima facie case has been made for stay of the order - Accordingly, stay application is allowed and the amount demanded under the impugned .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he dues payable to the service provider even though the duty element on the invoices issued by the service provider was fully discharged and credit availed was restricted to the said duty amount. Referring to Rule 4(7) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, the impugned order is sought to be justified by D. R. whereas the learned Advocate for the appellants has drawn our attention to Circular No. 122/3 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... equivalent to the amount that is paid as service tax. However, in case of subsequent refund or extra payment of service tax, the credit would also be altered accordingly. 5. The above circular clarifies that mere fact that the service recipient has cleared the duties of the service provider partially, that itself would not be justification to deny the benefit of Cenvat credit to the service re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X