2017 (4) TMI 699

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tely cannot be a ground to deny the credit to the appellant who has paid service tax and produced the invoices/hand written bills. Though it is stated in the impugned order that the hand written bills do not contain essential details, it is not stated as to what are the essential details in terms of Rule 4(A) of STR, 1994 that is required to make the invoices in order - appeal allowed - decided in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n bills has allowed credit of ₹ 33,33,870/- on the ground that the Service provider Shri C. Suresh, has remitted the said amount to Central Government. An amount of ₹ 9,73,038/- has been denied vaguely stating that the invoices do not contain necessary particulars. The Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the disallowance of ₹ 9,73,038/- stating that there is no evidence of payment .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hand written bills did not contain the essential details. Therefore, the disallowance is legal and proper. 5. It is seen from records that the service provider Shri C. Suresh has paid ₹ 33,33,870/- to Central Government and credit of this amount has been allowed by both authorities below even though the invoices are hand written. The show cause notice does not allege what are the discrep .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X