2019 (11) TMI 1514

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er under Rule 2(p) of the Cenvat Credit Rules. Revenue is also relying on Rule 5 of Taxation of Services (Provided from Outside India and Received in India) Rules. We find that Rule 5 refers to availing of Cenvat credit and not to utilization of credit. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
HON'BLE MR C J MATHEW, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) AND HON'BLE DR SUVENDU KUMAR PATI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri KS Ravishankar with Shri Anand N, Advocates for the appellant Shri Dilip Shinde, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the respondent ORDER PER: C J MATHEW This appeal arises from confirmation of demand of ₹ 4,74,70,902 under section 73 of Finance Act, 1994, along with interest of ₹ 8,33,425 under section 75 of Finance Act, 1994, be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ccount for discharge of such liability. 3. Learned Authorized Representative drew our attention to F no. B 1/4/2006-TRU dated 19th April 2006 issued by Government of India in Department of Revenue which, at paragraph no. 4.2.13, clarified that such services procured from abroad were not to be treated as taxable service for the purpose of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. He drew attention to the contents of section 66A of Finance Act, 1994 and the definitions in CENVAT Credit Rules as well as rule 3(4) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. 4. In re Kansara Modler Ltd, it was held by the Tribunal that '6. If we read Rule 2(q) of Cenvat Credit Rules with Rule 2(1)(d)(iv), we find that appellant is a person liable to Service Tax. Once appellant is person .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... - 2015 (37) S.T.R. 965 Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Commissioner of C. Ex., Chandigarh v. Nahar Industrial Enterprises Ltd. - 2012 (25) S.T.R. 129 and Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Service Tax v. Hero Honda Motors Ltd. - 2013 (29) S.T.R. 358. 7. The only distinction which Mr. Dwivedi, for the Revenue seeks to make in respect of the above decisions is that the above cases were concerned with discharge of service tax liability on reverse charge basis in respect of GTA service. In this case, it is discharge of tax liability on services received from foreign bank. In this case also, the respondents discharge the tax liability on reverse charge basis under Section 66A of the Finance Act, 1994. Thus, this dist .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X