9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 908X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not falling within the ambit of Rule 2(l) of the CCR 2004. In absence of making specific allegation in the show-cause notice, the appellant cannot be permitted to make out a new case on facts while passing the final order. The invoices and returns were necessary documents which were admittedly filed before the Jurisdictional Officer. Thus, necessary formalities and compliances were made by the respondent. The impugned order shows that they took U-turn during cross-examination. In that event, if the Tribunal has disbelieved their statements, the Tribunal has taken a plausible view which does not warrant any interference by this Court. In other words, the said contention of the Tribunal is a finding of fact and does not involve any substanti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant by taking this Court to the appeal Memo and substantial questions proposed submits that the learned Tribunal has committed an error in one sidedly relying upon the invoices and returns filed by the other side ignoring the recorded statements of dealers. In addition, there were certain emails on record to substantiate the same. 6. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the appellant fairly submits that admittedly, no action has been taken by the appellant against the Insurance Company for the same breach. No doubt, on this aspect, the Madras High Court in M/s Modular Auto Limited Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai North Commissionerate, Chennai 2018-VIL-541-MAD-ST opined that if no action is taken against the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... first stage. These Agreements have been entered into much before the investigation/enquiries were initiated. Therefore, there is nothing to indicate that the veracity of such documents is liable to be questioned. This Agreement clarifies role of the car dealer and the acceptance letter from their side shows the details of activities being undertaken by them. Subsequent to 01.07.2012, the Invoices raised by any service provider need not specify as to under what category of service they are providing the services. In respect of the service recipient also so long as the service falls within the definition of input service in terms of Rule 2 (l) of CCR 2004, they would be eligible to take the cenvat credit. The only condition being that the in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e to the Department. These car dealers are Service Tax assessee and have been filing their Returns with the Department. No questions have been asked nor any proceedings have been initiated against them by the jurisdictional authorities on any count. (Emphasis supplied) A plain reading of the findings in this order leaves no room for any doubt. The respondent filed invoices and returns before their jurisdictional offices and paid the service tax arising out of it. The Tribunal clearly held that even in the show-cause notice, there was no allegation that the services rendered under these invoices were not falling within the ambit of Rule 2(l) of the CCR 2004. We find substance in the finding of the Tribunal. In absence of making specific alle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
