Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2014 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (2) TMI 209 - AT - Central ExciseDenial of the Cenvat Credit of the service tax paid for the services rendered and billed to the head office of the appellant - Held that:- Invoices which are raised for the services rendered were in the name of the head office and their head office was not registered as input service distributor - Cenvat Credit which has been availed for the appellant of the service tax paid based on invoices/challans was in respect of the services provided by the Banks, Insurance Companies, transporters, Telecom Service, CHAs, Couriers, repairing & maintenance services. The invoices were issued on the name of the registered / head office situated at Mumbai. It transpires from the records that there is no dispute as to the fact that the services were rendered in this case. There is no allegation of non-receipt of input service or the allegation of service not relatable to the factory and also in view of the fact that invoice was in the name of head office of the same factory and not in the name of someone else, the decision of the Commissioner that extended period is not invocable also has to be upheld. Since I have taken a view that appellants are eligible for the credit and suppression of facts and extended period are not invocable, the question of penalty does not arise. Accordingly the penalty imposed is also set aside - Following decision of LARSEN & TOUBRO LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX, PUNE’II [2007 (5) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] - Decided in favour of assessee.
|