Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2019 (3) TMI 246

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rmation and inquired from them, they did not produce the required information immediately - this is a fit case to invoke extended period of limitation and invoke a demand. Wrongful utilization of CENVAT credit of input services consumed into exempted output services for payment of service tax - appellant has utilized 100% of credit taken instead only 20% as was prevalent during the relevant period in terms of Rule 6(3)(c) of CCR, 2004 - Held that:- It is true that during the relevant period only 20% of credit could be utilized but we find force in the argument of the appellant that they were not barred from taking credit but were only barred from utilizing it. They were free to utilize remaining 80% in the immediate next financial year. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... registered with Central Excise Department for providing cargo handling service , clearing and forwarding agent service and storage and warehousing service . Gathering intelligence that they were (a) not paying service tax on storage and warehousing service in respect of certain goods and (b) wrongly utilizing CENVAT credit of input services consumed into exempted output services for payment of service tax, officers of Central Excise department visited their premises on 10.11.2007 as the appellant had not provided the required records. They again visited the appellant on 18.12.2007 and verified the records which showed that (1) the assessee were not paying service tax on storage and warehousing charges collected in respect of Soya bean .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the demand and imposing penalties as proposed. Hence this appeal. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits as follows: 1. Storage Warehousing charges in respect of Soya bean meal: In this case they were only renting their warehouse to their sister concern which is a different legal entity and were charging only rent. Mere renting of premises cannot be treated as warehousing service. Their sister concern has done stacking, loading and unloading, etc. They also argued that soya bean meal is stacked and subsequently exported and hence it may be treated as cargo handling service related to export and it cannot be charged under the head of storage and warehousing service . They had no intention to evade tax and there was no wilful .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... storage of soya bean meal which they subsequently exported is concerned, we find that in the first place, soya bean meal is different from soya bean. Soya bean is agricultural produce and when oil is extracted from it, what is left is known as soya bean meal. This soya bean meal was being stored in the warehouses of the appellant by a different legal entity, which is related to the appellant and was paying storage charged for the storage and warehousing. Once the appellant is charging a sum for storage of the goods which belongs to another legal entity, the amounts have to be considered as storage and warehousing charges and a service tax has to be paid accordingly. The appellant has clearly not paid the service tax nor have they disclosed .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n the ground that appellant has utilized 100% of credit taken instead only 20% as was prevalent during the relevant period in terms of Rule 6(3)(c) of CCR, 2004. It is true that during the relevant period only 20% of credit could be utilized but we find force in the argument of the appellant that they were not barred from taking credit but were only barred from utilizing it. They were free to utilize remaining 80% in the immediate next financial year. Therefore, the demand on this ground does not sustain. As several years have passed, the appellant would have been entitled to utilize the credit subsequent to the period in question and therefore the demand on this ground needs to be set aside and we do so. 9. As far as the demand of ͅ .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates