9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 495X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ember (Technical) For the Petitioner : None For the Respondent : Sri S.S.Chatterjee, Supt.(AR) ORDER Per Sri H.K.Thakur 1. This Appeal has been filed by the Appellant against Order-in-Appeal No.258-259/Kol-III/2011 dated 16.09.2011. 2. When the case was called out for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the Appellant. On earlier occasion when the case was fixed for hearing on 08.01.2016, also none appeared on behalf of the Appellant. 3. Sri S.S.Chatterjee, Supt.(A.R) appearing on behalf of the Revenue argued that the issue involved in the present proceedings is regarding Cenvat Credit wrongly taken by the Head Office of the Appellant with respect to the services availed by the branch offices of the Headquarters s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut Service Distributor in terms of Rule 3 of the Service Tax (Registration of Special Category of Persons) Rules 2005 read with Rule 7 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. On a similar set of facts, CESTAT, Bangalore in the case of Mangalore Refinery Petrochemicals v. CCE, Mangalore (supra) held as follows :- 2. I have given careful consideration to the submissions. The specific statutory provisions requiring any office of a manufacturing unit or output service providing unit to take ISD registration for the purpose of distributing CENVAT credit on any input service received by it under cover of invoices/bills/challans issued by the input service provider, to its own manufacturing unit or output service-providing unit are clear. ISD, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at Mangalore chose to take Cenvat credit on BOFS provided by Corporation Bank, on the strength of the invoices issued by the bank to the Mumbai office of the company. Again, it is not in dispute that the Mumbai office of the appellant-company, which was, effectually, the recipient of the Service rendered by the bank, allowed the Mangalore unit to take Cenvat credit of the Service Tax paid on the said service. This was not permissible inasmuch as the transactions involved distribution of Cenvat credit by the Mumbai office of the appellant-company to its Mangalore unit without obtaining ISD registration and issuing invoices in terms of sub-rule (2) of Rule 4A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. If it is held that the availment of Cenvat credit by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
