9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 128X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cturing unit has availed credit on the invoices issued on ISD (name and address of the Head Office) - denied also on the ground that certain services were not included in the ISD registration during the disputed period and required endorsement for including such services were not obtained by the appellant - HELD THAT:- In M/S. WABCO INDIA LTD. VERSUS CCE, CHENNAI-II [ 2018 (5) TMI 777 - CESTAT CHENNAI] , the Tribunal has relied upon the decision of the Hon ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE VERSUS DASHION LTD [ 2016 (2) TMI 183 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] which held that even if Head Office did not obtain ISD registration, the credit distributed cannot be denied - credit cannot be denied on this ground. Pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T credit on inputs, capital goods and input service. The appellants were also having an Export Oriented Unit (EOU) in the said premises at Neelankarai, which was registered with the Customs Department and thereafter got transferred under the administrative control of Central Excise Department till their exit from the EOU scheme on 31.3.2011 after due process of law. Apart from the above units, the appellant is also registered as a dealer at Ponneri Taluk. The 100% EOU and DTA unit related documents and accounts are managed by only one office with common infrastructure and staff. This office is located at Neelankarai. A combined balance sheet is maintained for all the three units viz. EOU, DTA Unit and dealer. On scrutiny of documents, it wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e decision of the Tribunal in the case of Kotsons Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise 2016 (333) ELT 456 (Tri. Chennai) as well as Greenland Traders Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise 2019 (2) TMI 1250 CESTAT Chennai. 2.1 For the balance amount of ₹ 3,74,77,389/- for the period January 2010 to August 2011, the credit has been disallowed on three grounds. Firstly, that the appellant who is a manufacturing unit has availed credit on invoices issued in the name and addresses of Head Office / ISD registered unit. He submitted that the both units are in the same premises and the manufacturing unit which is the appellant herein had availed the credit on the invoices which were issued in the name and address of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Gujarat in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Dashion Ltd. 2016 (41) STR 884 (Guj.) wherein it was specifically held that even if invoices are received prior to obtaining ISD registration, credit cannot be denied. The said decision has been accepted by the Board as per para 2 of Circular No. 1063/2/2018-CX dated 16.2.2018. He also placed reliance on the decision of WABCO India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise 2018 (5) TMI 777 CESTAT Chennai. That in the present case, there is no allegation that the Head Office was not registered as an ISD. Further allegation is that certain services were not endorsed in the ISD registration. According to department, the appellant though had availed certain input services had not ren ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an avail credit only on a document which is issued by the ISD unit and not on the invoices issued in the name of the Head Office. 4. Heard both sides. 5. With regard to amount of ₹ 1,73,33,050/-, the ld. counsel for appellant has submitted that the issue is not contested on merits. He submitted that the appellant could not furnish the documents to the adjudicating authority and has reversed the credit even prior to issuance of the show cause notice. He has relied upon the decisions in Kotsons Pvt. Ltd. (supra) to argue that the penalty is unwarranted. Taking note of the fact that the appellant has reversed the credit more than three years before issuance of the show cause notice, we are of the considere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the assessee cannot be compelled to comply with the requirement of pro-rata distribution. On this score, we find that the credit availed is legal and proper. Relying upon the decisions and after appreciating the facts, we are of the considered opinion that the disallowance of credit for the period from January 2010 to August 2011 for an amount of ₹ 3,74,77,389/- cannot sustain and requires to be set aside, which we hereby do. 6. From the above discussions, the impugned order is modified to the extent of setting aside the penalty in respect of an amount of ₹ 1,73,33,052/- confirmed in the impugned order and also set aside the demand of ₹ 3,74,77,389/- entirely. The appeal is partly allowed in the above ter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
