9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 1109X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... specifically excluded from the definition of input services as defined under Rule 2 (l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, w.e.f. 01.07.2012? - HELD THAT:- Admittedly there is no material on record to show that these services were utilised for personal consumption to deny credit. Respondent/Assessee is a company and therefore issue of personal consumption does not arise. These expenses are admittedly incurred for its employees who are working for the respondent/assessee in the course of its business to render output services - Whether any service is used for personal consumption or not is certainly question of fact. Furthermore, on other services, the appellant / revenue has not disputed this position. In view thereof, this being question of fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... redit which they propose to disallow since there is no dispute that the said CENVAT credit is taken on input services and the services on which the service tax has been discharged were exported. Therefore the effect of denial of credit would be that the appellant / revenue will have to refund the said credit amount resulting into whole exercise being tax neutral. Thus, no substantial question of law arises in as much as on account of retrospective amendment, respondent/assessee is deemed to have rendered the broadcasting services and in the alternative based on the admission of appellant /revenue, the amount of input tax credit of which is taken has been collected without any authority of law and therefore would be required to be refunded. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce. (d) the CESTAT, being last fact finding authority, has passed unreasoned and non-speaking order ? 2. At the time of the hearing, the learned counsel for appellant/revenue pressed for questions (b) and (c) only. 3. Respondent / Assessee is registered with the Service Tax Authorities for Broadcasting Service, TV or Radio Programme Production, Sound Recording Service, Advertising etc. In the course of audit by appellant / revenue, it was noticed that respondent / assessee does not have physical establishment for providing taxable output service viz. Broadcasting service, but has availed CENVAT credit in respect of input services used for providing Broadcasting service. Pursuant thereto, show cause notices dated 1st April 2015 and 21st Apri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot is certainly question of fact. Furthermore, on other services, the appellant / revenue has not disputed this position. In view thereof, this being question of fact, no substantial question of law arises from the impugned order of the Tribunal. 5. Insofar as question (c) is concerned, respondent / assessee is a subsidiary of Singapore Company. Being agent of Singapore Company, respondent / assessee procures various services in India and exports the same to Singapore. Respondent / Assessee discharges service tax liability on various amount collected from sale of time slot, subscription charges etc. before remitting the money to Singapore. Respondent / Assessee takes input tax credit on the aforesaid service tax paid and same has been accep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the parent channel in India selling advertisement time slots and collecting the broadcasting charges. There is no dispute that respondent/assessee is an agent of its parent principal for the purpose of service tax and therefore, the service tax paid by the agent on Broadcasting service is deemed to have been utililsed by respondent / assessee for rendering broadcasting service by deeming fiction as per the amendment of the Finance Act, 2002. Appellant / revenue cannot contend that for tax liability respondent / assessee is a broadcaster, but while claiming set-off of these liability, they are not a broadcaster. Therefore, the contention of appellant / revenue that respondent / assessee does not have the physical establishment for renderin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lf, the CENVAT credit which is sought to be disallowed is required to be refunded because it is settled position that no tax can be collected without authority of law. If it is the admission of appellant/revenue that service tax paid by respondent / assessee on input services is without authority of law then they are liable to refund the same and therefore the impugned action of denying credit of such taxes would only result into the respondent/assessee being eligible for refund of tax collected without authority of law. This again would result into tax neutral exercise. 9. Therefore looked from any angle, in our view, no substantial question of law arises in as much as on account of retrospective amendment, respondent/assessee is deemed to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
