TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 288X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... NO.FO/A/75480/2016 - Dated:- 8-7-2016 - Shri H. K. Thakur, Member(Technical) Shri Rajiv Kr. Agarwal, C.A. for the Appellant Shri J.Bose, AC(AR) for the Revenue ORDER Per Shri H. K. Thakur This Appeal has been filed by the Appellant against Order-in-Appeal No.08/KOL-VII/2013 dated 30.03.2013 passed by the Commissioner(Appeal-I) of Central Excise Service Tax, Kolkata. 2. Shri Rajiv Kr. Agarwal (C.A.) appearing on behalf of the Appellant argued that a Cenvat Credit of ₹ 3,46,659/- was taken by the Appellant on the basis of services received by the Headquarters of the Appellant. That Cenvat Credit was taken on the basis of photocopy of such document of services rendered to the Head Office. That taking of cred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t for services received by all the units of the Head Office. In the case of Alarsin vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-I, CESTAT-Mumbai held as follows:- 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. The issue involved in this case is regarding eligibility of CENVAT credit of service tax paid by a Marketing Agency. The appellant has two units one is at Udhna in Gujarat and one in Mumbai. Gujarat Marketing Agency has provided the services of Business Auxiliary Services. For the products manufactured in Gujarat as well as in Mumbai. It is also undisputed that the goods were being manufactured and cleared from Udhana, Gujarat as well as Mumbai. It is the case of the Revenue that service tax paid on the services rendered for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that when there is no dispute as regards the services received by the appellant for the activity and service tax liability having been discharged by the service provider, omission to take registration as an Input Service Distributor is to be considered as procedure irregularity. The ratio of decision taken by the Bench in the case of Doshion Ltd. (supra) which is in para 5 is reproduced.:- 5. We have considered the submissions made by both sides. We find considerable force in the arguments advanced by the learned counsel. The registered office and Vatva office both are located in the same place and appellant has simply utilised the credit at Vatva instead of distributing it to various units. As submitted by the learned counsel, duri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ument was produced before the department. In this regard it is relevant to mention that in the second last para under assessee s submission in Order-in-Original No.33/DC/CE/BPD/2009-10 dated 17.02.2010 during the adjudication proceedings Appellant made a submission that all the original documents mentioned in the proceedings are available at the Headquarters for inspection/review by the department. 7. In view of the above Appeal filed by the Appellant is allowed on merits subject to the condition that the original duty paying document, on the basis of which Service Tax credit was taken, should be produced before the Adjudicating Authority for perusal. For this limited purpose only the case is remanded back to the Adjudicating Authority f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
