2008 (2) TMI 810 - Commissioner - Service Tax

Summary

Issues involved: Appeal against Order-in-Original regarding service tax liability, Cenvat credit utilization, imposition of penalties.

Details of the judgment:

Issue 1: Service tax liability and Cenvat credit utilization
- The appellants, a cotton yarn manufacturer registered for service tax under Transport of Goods by Road Service, were alleged to have utilized Cenvat credit for inward transportation service tax payment.
- Assistant Commissioner confirmed the demand for service tax, education cess, interest, and penalties under Sections 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.
- The Assistant Commissioner held that Cenvat credit can only be utilized for payment of service tax on output service, not inward transportation.
- The appellants contended that they were entitled to Cenvat credit as they were a provider of taxable service and manufacturer of final products.
- The appellants argued that even after the removal of the explanation to Rule 2(p), the goods transport service received by them should be considered an output service.
- The Commissioner found that the appellants, as a service receiver, were deemed service providers for the purpose of paying service tax, allowing them to use Cenvat credit for tax payment.
- The Commissioner set aside the Order-in-Original, stating that since the demand failed, there was no basis for interest or penalty imposition.

Issue 2: Legal interpretation and application
- The Commissioner analyzed the legal provisions under Rule 3(4) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, Section 68(2) of the Finance Act, 1994, and Rule 2(p) of the Cenvat Credit Rules.
- The Commissioner emphasized that the legal fiction created by Section 68(2) required the appellants to pay service tax as if they were service providers, enabling them to use Cenvat credit for tax payment.
- The Commissioner highlighted that when a statutory provision clearly designates a party as a service provider, there is no restriction on utilizing Cenvat credit for tax payment.
- The Commissioner concluded that the appellants were within their rights to pay service tax through their Cenvat credit account, dismissing the demand and penalties imposed by the Assistant Commissioner.

Conclusion:
- The Commissioner allowed the appeal, setting aside the Order-in-Original passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Anantapur.
- The judgment clarified the legal fiction created by Section 68(2) of the Finance Act, 1994, enabling the appellants to utilize Cenvat credit for service tax payment as deemed service providers.
- The decision emphasized the entitlement of deemed service providers to avail Cenvat credit for tax payment, rejecting the imposition of penalties and interest due to the failure of the initial demand.