9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 906X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 06 does not restrict the availment of other input services which have contributed in the provisions of their other output services. Extended period of limitation - Held that: - the demand is hit by limitation for the period October 2008 to September 2010 because the assessee has not concealed any information from the Department and the Department has failed to bring in any evidence on record to prove that assessee indulged in fraud, suppression of facts, collusion or willful mis-statement with an intend to evade payment of duty - demand set aside. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - ST/20472/2014-SM - 20839/2017 - Dated:- 24-1-2017 - Shri S. S. Garg, Judicial Member Mr. K. T. Pakshirajan, AR For the Appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Commissioner (A) on the ground that the credit availed by the assessee was proper and correct inasmuch as they are eligible to avail credit for the period prior to registration as per CENVAT Credit Rules (CCR), 2004 which did not impose any time limit nor make registration a pre-condition for availment of CENVAT credit and further that the services which are exported cannot be termed as exempted services to deny the CENVAT credit to them. They have also raised the ground that there is no restriction under the statute for utilization of CENVAT credit towards payment of service tax on import of services and further, the demand of service tax is more than the amount proposed in the show-cause notice which is illegal. They have also raised t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nformation to the department and the department did not raise any objection and it was in the knowledge of the department regarding the activities of the assessee. He further submitted that in order to avail CENVAT credit, it is not necessary that the assessee must have the registration. He further submitted that the issue of eligibility to credit was not at all questioned in the show-cause notice or during the correspondences with the respondent. He also submitted that the demand of service tax is more than the amount proposed in the show-cause notice and the same is illegal. He further submitted that denial of credit on input services to the extent of ₹ 22,94,163/- is wrongly denied on the ground that the services provided by the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rior to registration is concerned, this issue is no more res integra and has been settled in favour of the assessee by the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of mPortal India Wireless Solutions Pvt. Ltd.: 2012 (27) STR 134 wherein the Hon ble High Court has categorically held that registration with the Department is not a pre-requisite for claiming the credit and that credit can be claimed on export. He also submitted that the findings of the adjudicating authority is legal untenable as far as demand of service tax for import of service on the ground that the same cannot be paid by way of utilization of CENVAT credit is erroneous. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
