9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 1223X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... services were in fact used for setting up of Semmankuppam facility - The fact that these services were in fact used for setting up of Semmankuppam facility and the services were indeed availed by the appellant can be verified with supporting document - matter on remand. Credit can be availed by the service recipient if the documents issued contain all the essential requirement of Rule 9 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. In fact, the said rule provides for certain discretion to the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner which can also be exercised to such satisfaction of the conditions. Credit also denied on the ground that the appellant did not pay the full consideration for the services received - Held that: - appellant submitted that for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ormed basis of such credit, entertained a view that these credits were not available to the appellant on the ground that (a) many of the documents on which credits were taken where addressed to a non-registered address of the appellant at Radha Nagar, Cuddalore and (b) credits were also taken on ISD invoices issued by Head Office of the appellant at Cathedral Road, Chennai. There is no evidence that such services were actually services used for taxable manufacturing or output service. Here again, the ISD invoices had the address of Radha Nagar. There were other miscellaneous issues with reference to credit taken on invoices address of other manufacturing facility of the appellant as well as ineligible documents like debit notes etc. The ori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and linking all these documents to the effect to satisfactorily establish that these input services were in fact used for setting up of Semmankuppam facility. The fact that these services were in fact used for setting up of Semmankuppam facility and the services were indeed availed by the appellant can be verified with supporting document as mentioned above. The jurisdictional officer can undertake such verification for which the appellant submits that they will provide all supporting evidence. 5. Regarding other issues of taking credit on invoices meant for other units, the ld. counsel for the appellants submitted that out of 7 instances mentioned in the impugned order, at para 7.1, invoices with reference to one Karaikal unit of the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... can establish the same with supporting evidence. Since we are remanding the matter, in view of the above observation, these aspects can also be readjudicated by the original authority based on the case laws which were available on the said subject after issue of the impugned order. 8. In view of the above discussion and analysis, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter back to the adjudicating authority for a fresh decision keeping in view the observation made above. Appeals are allowed by way of remand. 9. The miscellaneous applications filed for change of cause title of the name of the respondent to Commissioner, GST Central Excise, Trichy are allowed. (Dictated and pronounced in open court) - - TaxTMI - TMIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
