9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 19X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent is providing both taxable and exempted services. During the course of verification of input tax credit availed by respondent, it was observed by the authorities that the respondent had shown certain services namely, house keeping services, man power, recruitment services, credit card services, ATM services under the category of management, maintenance or repair service and technical and analysis service etc. which are one of the services specified in Rule 6(5) of the CENVAT Credit Rules (the 'Rules' for short). The respondent department noticed that the respondent had wrongly utilized credits of service tax paid on these services to the extent of 100% of the amount of service tax payable on taxable output services for the period ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 56,68,210/-. Interest and penalty were demanded on this amount in terms of the Rules read with Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1974. 3. Aggrieved by this order, the respondent preferred an appeal before the CESTAT in ST/35/665/2012. The CESTAT rejected the appeal as regards the normal period, in respect of wrong classification of services and directed the assessee to make the payment of Rs. 3,71,501/- and interest of Rs. 4025/-. Thus, the appeal was partly allowed by the Tribunal. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, the revenue is before this Court raising the following substantial questions of law: 1. "Whether the CESTAT is empowered to allow the utilization of Cenvat Credit in excess of 20% till 31.03.2008 and as per the ratio prescribed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent was liable to pay the amount determined by the original authority which is wrongly waived off by the Tribunal without assigning any valid reasons. Accordingly, he seeks to set-aside the order passed by the Tribunal and to confirm the order passed in original alternatively, learned counsel seeks to remand the matter to the Original Authority to examine the invoices vis-a-vis certificates issued by the Chartered Accountant as regards the availment of CENVAT Credit by the respondent, whether exceeds 20% of the taxable output service or not in terms of Rule 63(3)(c) of the Rules and with regard to the other issues raised in the appeal. 6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent though supported the order passed by the T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
