9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 60X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y time after receipt of inputs and input services along with the duty paying documents. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - APPEAL No. E/51875/2015-EX[SM] - FINAL ORDER NO. 70385/2018 - Dated:- 21-2-2018 - MR. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) Shri Prabhat Kumar (Advocate), for Appellant Shri Sandeep Kumar Singh (Dy. Commr.) AR, for Respondent Per: Anil Choudhary The issue in this appeal is whether the appellant assessee have rightly taken Cenvat credit based on ISD invoices Issued by the then head offices during the period August, 2010 to April, 2011. 2. The brief facts are that the appellant - R S P L Ltd. (Formerly known as M/S Rohit Surfactants Pvt. Ltd.) is engaged in the manufacture of Detergent Cake/ Powder, Acid Slurry and Spent Sulphuric Acid. The head office of the appellant is situated at Kanpur and they have got 5/51875/2015-EXISMI several manufacturing units including one at Sahibabad. During the verification of records by the auditors of AGUP, Lucknow in January, 2012, it appeared that appellant have wrongly availed and utilized Cenvat credit of ₹ 22,82,487/- on input services, on invoices issued by ISD, which were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is concerned. It was observed that these items fall under chapter 73 and are not explicitly covered in the definition of capital goods. The appellant could not produce any drawing or a certificate issued by a Chartered Engineer before the Adjudicating Authority showing these items as parts, accessories of machine as claimed by them. Accordingly, credit was held rightly denied. 4. Being aggrieved the appellant is before this Tribunal. The learned counsel for the appellant states that Cenvat credit has been denied on the ground that the three challans issued by the ISD with respect to input service totaling ₹ 22,82,487 / -, were not accompanied by the enclosure at the time of audit. However, it has been admitted in the show cause notice and the Order-in-Original itself that such enclosures were furnished by the appellant to the Range Superintendent by letter dated 21/07 / 2012. Second reason for denial of credit is that ISD distributed the said credit after long period of time, ranging from 1 to 4 years. Cenvat credit of ₹ 1,53,188/- has been denied on the ground that the items fall under chapter 73 and hence cannot be treated as capital goods under CCR, 2004. 4.1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r of invoices (of the providers of the input services) is very voluminous. The enclosures contain the name, address and registration number of the person providing the input services and the serial number and date of invoices, bill or as the case may be, Challan issued under the sub-rule (1). Hence, the requirement of Rule 4A(2)(i) is fulfilled. All the three invoices contain the name and address of the input service distributor i.e., M/S Rohit Surfactants Pvt. Ltd., Kanpur. Hence, the requirement of Rule 4A(2) (ii) is fulfilled. All the three invoices contain the name and address of the recipient of the credit distributed, i.e., the appellant. Therefore, the requirement of Rule 4 A (2) (iii) is fulfilled. Lastly, all the three invoices contain the amount of credit distributed. Hence, the requirement of Rule 4 A (2) (iv) is fulfilled. It is not the case of the department that the enclosures of the aforesaid three invoices in question did not contain all the requisite particulars required under the provisions of Rule 4 A (2) of the Service Tax Rules. Hence, the impugned order is liabe to be set aside. 43 Availability of requisite particulars has not been questioned in the impu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t credit availed on the basis of invoices issued by ISD, it was held that denial of Cenvat credit distributed by ISD was not justified when the credit distributed, against the documents referred to in Rule 9 of CCR, 2004, does not exceed the amount of service tax paid thereof. Further credit of service tax applicable to services used for unit exclusively engaged in the manufacture of exempted goods, or providing of exempted services not distributed. Further it was held that demand regarding admissibility of credit, as such, needs to be raised at the end of ISD and not at the unit level in view of the provisions of Rule 7 read with Rule 9 of CCR, 2004, It was also held that Cenvat credit on various input services like Advertising Agency Service, Business Auxiliary Services, Business Support Services, Management Consultancy Services, Online Information Data Base Access Service, Port Service, Maintenance Repair Service etc. is admissible. Reliance is also placed on the ruling in the case of CCE V se Jindal Steel Power Ltd. 2011 (263) E.L.T. 557 (Tri.-De1.), wherein assessee had taken Cenvat credit on various items like Lattice Steel Structure, Lattice Type Transmission Tower, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
