9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1992X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... PUNJAB HARYANA HIGH COURT] had given a contradictory decision - It is thereafter that the matter was referred to Hon ble Supreme Court. Subsequent thereto there has been a CBEC Circular No. 934/4/2011 dated 29.04.2011 vide which the scope of sales promotion activities as mentioned in explanation to Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (as was inserted vide Notification No. 2/2016 dated 03.02.2016) was considered. The said clarificatory Circular was issued by the Department with a view to resolve the confusion prevalent due to the different views of the different High Courts - It was clarified therein that an explanation inserted in a Section/ Rule is generally to explain the meaning and intendments of the said Section/ Rule. Somet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it of service tax of Rs. 22,92,316/- as availed by the respondent for the period w.e.f. September, 2015 to February 2016 alongwith interest and the proportionate penalty. The said proposal was confirmed vide the Order of Assistant Commissioner bearing No. 25/CE/16-17 dated 06.06.2017. Being aggrieved an Appeal was preferred. Commissioner (Appeals) vide Order No. 204-205(SM)/CE/JPR/2018 dated 25.04.2018 allowed the Appeal with the consequential benefits to follow. However, vide subsequent review Order No. 119-120 dated 26.07.2018 the Department moved in Appeal before us. It is submitted on behalf of the Department that the sales Commission Services have already been denied to be the input services and the assesse has already been held not to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red to Hon ble Supreme Court. Subsequent thereto there has been a CBEC Circular No. 934/4/2011 dated 29.04.2011 vide which the scope of sales promotion activities as mentioned in explanation to Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (as was inserted vide Notification No. 2/2016 dated 03.02.2016) was considered. The said clarificatory Circular was issued by the Department with a view to resolve the confusion prevalent due to the different views of the different High Courts. 4. It was clarified therein that an explanation inserted in a Section/ Rule is generally to explain the meaning and intendments of the said Section/ Rule. Sometimes when the explanation is inserted to clarify a doubtful point of law it would be effectively retrospectiv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
