9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 1209X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ciate that the Government has not mandated that records of Service Tax Payable Register and Service Tax Credit Register should be maintained by the taxpayer or on other electronic device. These records are being maintained by the appellant since beginning and no objection was raised by the Department or by the Audit Team. Hence the objection of the appellate authority to the effect that the registers are maintained manually by the appellant is without any valid basis and the same is not sustainable in the eyes of law. Disallowance of credit for want of the correct challan - HELD THAT:- The challan number in show cause notice (28067) is nothing but a typographical error. Substantial benefit which is otherwise available to the appellant cannot be denied merely on the basis of the typographical error that too, committed at the end of the department. Similar error has been committed with respect to challan filed with Entry No. 1669 dated 06.07.2017. Only one challan admittedly pertains to the said entry. Appellant has claimed it to be the Challan bearing No. 29935 dated 06.07.2017. For the same reason as above mentioning of 29936 as challan number is held to be nothing but a typograph ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 28067 and was 29935 instead of 29936. Though Commissioner (Appeals) dealt this ground but didn't accept holding that there is no evidence to prove the same. Being aggrieved of these findings, the appellant is before this Tribunal. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the impugned order has ignored the Final Order No. 50503 of 2022 dated 06.06.2022 passed by this Tribunal remanding the matter with the direction to appreciate the challans and the typographical errors contained in the challans. It is submitted that challan numbers given in the AG Audit report/show cause notice were misprinted and hence do not match with the challan numbers available with the appellant. Despite the entire evidence produced by the appellant the same has been ignored and hence the demand confirmed is contrary to the said evidence and contrary to the directions of remand. The order is accordingly, prayed to be set aside and appeal is prayed to be allowed. 5. Learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, has reiterated the findings arrived at by Commissioner (Appeals) while confirming the demand in question. Impressing upon no infirmity therein. The appeal is prayed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed Counsel. Keeping in view the same, the request of remanding the matter is hereby accepted. The matter is remanded back to the Commissioner (Appeals) to appreciate both the challans and to look into the documents produced by the appellant and to appreciate as to whether there is any typographic error. It is thereafter to pass the fresh decision without being affected by any findings in this order." 9. The order-in-appeal bearing No. 59/2024 dated 08.02.2024 is passed thereafter. We observe that despite those directions of this Tribunal the findings in the impugned order in appeal challenged vide the present appeal are same. Both the challans still been same, however, on the ground that though the service tax register mentioning availment of credit mentions the challan number as 28069 and 29935 but the register does not bear signature of the authorized signatory of the appellant. Hence authenticity about the typographical error stands unverified. The demand of Rs. 5,26,497/- thus has again been confirmed. It has been held as follows: "First, I take up the issue of ITC amounting to Rs. 461224/-. As per the AG Audit, the appellant had taken ITC of Rs. 461224/- on the strength of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the end of each month where summary of the transactions of the month was prepared and tabulated at the month end. It appears that the appellate authority has overlooked the signatures in both the registers in discarding these registers as merely a piece of paper. The objection of the appellate authority that the registers were maintained manually is without any basis. He failed to appreciate that the Government has not mandated that records of Service Tax Payable Register and Service Tax Credit Register should be maintained by the taxpayer or on other electronic device. These records are being maintained by the appellant since beginning and no objection was raised by the Department or by the Audit Team. Hence the objection of the appellate authority to the effect that the registers are maintained manually by the appellant is without any valid basis and the same is not sustainable in the eyes of law. 11. The appellant in terms of CBEC Circular No. 207/5/2017-ST dated 28.09.2017 and in terms of relevant provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 is eligible for Cenvat credit of service tax paid on input services. The Cenvat credit was admissible in respect of services received after t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
