2024 (3) TMI 1102

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... D ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] that if the appellant has taken Cenvat Credit wrongly, Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 empowers the authorities to recover such credit availed by the assessee wrongly. Admittedly in this case, no demand has been raised against the appellant under Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Therefore, relying on the decision of the Hon ble Telengana High Court in the case of Tiara Advertising vs. UOI, it s held that the demands are not sustainable against the appellant, therefore, the impugned order is set aside - appeal allowed.
HON'BLE SHRI ASHOK JINDAL , MEMBER ( JUDICIAL ) And HON'BLE SHRI K. ANPAZHAKAN , MEMBER ( TECHNICAL ) NONE for the Appellant Shri Mihir Ranjan , Special Counsel for the Rev .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... amount sought to be recovered @ 5%/6% and 8%/10% of the exempted services. It is the submission of the appellant that no demand can be raised under Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 for non-maintaining of separate account for input/input services for providing taxable as well as exempted services. Demand can be raised under Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. To support this issue, the appellant has relied on the decision of Hon'ble Telegana High Court in the case of Tiara Advertising vs. UOI [2019 (30) G.S.T.L. 474 (Telengana)]. 5. On the other hand, the Ld.Special Counsel, appearing on behalf of the Revenue contested the issue and submits that it is an admitted fact that the appellant is not maintaining separate account of i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nterest. However, the second respondent did not choose to exercise power under this Rule but relied upon Rule 6(3)(i) and made the choice of the option thereunder for the petitioner, viz., to pay 5%/6% of the value of the exempted services. The statutory scheme did not vest the second respondent with the power of making such a choice on behalf of the petitioner. The Order-in-Original, to the extent that it proceeded on these lines, therefore cannot be countenanced." 7. As held by the Hon'ble Telengana High Court that if the appellant has taken Cenvat Credit wrongly, Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 empowers the authorities to recover such credit availed by the assessee wrongly. Admittedly in this case, no demand has been raised ag .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X