9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1314X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ber 2011. Inasmuch as with effect from 1.4.2011, the construction services were excluded from the definition of input services, the appellant was given a show cause notice dated 12.6.2015 raising demand of duty of Rs. 44,84,158/-. 2. During adjudication, the appellant contended that though the credit has been availed subsequent to April 2011 on the basis of the invoices issued during the period October 2010 to November 2011 but the services were so obtained by them prior to 1.4.2011. The demand was also assailed on the point of limitation. 3. The original adjudicating authority did not find favour with the above stand of the assessee and confirmed the demand along with imposition of penalty. On appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) observed that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ails of disputed CENVAT credit availed in monthly ER-1 returns filed by them with department during the period covered by this case and also that they had exchanged correspondence with the department on the very issue during the relevant time. They thus have argued and contended that every fact was brought by them to the knowledge of the department and thereby they had not hidden suppressed any fact from the department. In view of the absence of mens rea and non suppression of facts by them the show cause notice was required to be issued within one year viz. within the normal time limit but was issued beyond one year time limit hence it was clearly hit by time bar factor. In this context, I find that the appellant has not produced any evide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld. AR that in the self assessment era, the appellant should have claimed the credit in accordance with law is too general an argument. If the same is accepted, the provisions of proviso to Section 11A would become redundant and otiose. On being questioned, the ld. AR fairly agreed that there is no column in ER-1 return to give the break up of various input services, thus casting no obligation on the part of the assessee to give the details of the input service in which such credit stands availed. Such details would be available in RG 23A Part I & Part II accounts being maintained by the appellant and the Revenue is within it powers and jurisdiction to seek such information as regards the input service, if in doubt. The appellant cannot be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
