9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1237X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pplicability of Rule 9(1)(bb) of the CENVAT Credit Rules - Held that:- In the present case, the appellant has availed CENVAT credit of service tax paid on import of services under the reverse charge mechanism on the basis of ST challans in accordance with the provisions of Rule 9(1)(e) which allows the assessee to take CENVAT credit on the basis of challan in case of reverse charge mechanism - Both the authorities have wrongly denied the CENVAT credit by invoking Rule 9(1)(bb) which is not applicable in the present case. Tribunal in the case of Polygenta Technology Ltd. [2018 (2) TMI 804 - CESTAT, MUMBAI], the Mumbai Bench of CESTAT on an identical facts has held that The appellant is paying service tax on reverse charge basis in terms of R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... exported for the period from July 2014 to September 2014 in terms of Notification No.27/2012-CE (NT) dated 18.6.2012 issued under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. On scrutiny of the refund claim, a show-cause notice was issued alleging that the appellant is not eligible to avail CENVAT credit on service tax paid on import of services under Reverse Charge Mechanism and payment of service tax has been made in the subsequent quarter. It was alleged that the amount of tax paid by the appellant was not eligible for credit as the same was paid based on audit of the department and the said demand was confirmed by the Order-in-Original. Further, the credit was sought to be denied in terms of provisions contained in Rule 9(1)(bb) of the CENV ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Mad.) (iii) Polygenta Technologies Ltd. vs. CCE, Nasik-I: 2018 (2) TMI 804 - CESTAT-MUMBAI 5.1 He further submitted that this Tribunal in the case Polygenta Technologies Ltd. (supra) wherein an identical issue was involved. The Tribunal after considering the Rule 9(1)(bb) and Rule 9(1)(e) of CENVAT Credit Rules has held that credit cannot be denied. 6. On the other hand, the learned AR defended the impugned order. 7. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that in the present case, the appellant has availed CENVAT credit of service tax paid on import of services under the reverse charge mechanism on the basis of ST challans in accordance with the provisions of Rule 9(1)(e) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
