2011 (9) TMI 456 - AT - Service Tax

Cenvat Credit - Input Service Distributor - Credit Denied on the ground that strength on which credit availed were not the documents as per Rule 4A(2) of the Service Tax Rules 1994 - Held- learned advocate produced all the details - Case remanded back to original jurisdiction.

Summary

Issues:
- Denial of input credit on service tax availed by the appellant
- Compliance with Rule 4A(2) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994
- Details provided by the appellant for availing input service tax credit
- Opposition by the authorized representative regarding compliance with Rule 4A(2)
- Examination of documents by the adjudicating authority

Analysis:
The appellant appealed against the denial of input credit on service tax availed during their business operations. The appellant had two factories, one in Pune and another in Ankleshwar, with a head office in Pune. They availed input service tax credit based on a letter from their head office registered as an input service distributor. The issue arose when it was contended that the letters did not meet the requirements of Rule 4A(2) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, leading to the denial of credit by lower authorities. The appellant argued compliance with all rule requirements and provided details of documents supporting the credit distribution. However, the lower authorities did not consider these documents, resulting in the denial of credit.

The appellant's advocate emphasized that all necessary details were included in the letter, and the appellant had provided relevant documents on CENVAT credit availed. On the contrary, the authorized representative opposed the appeal, stating non-compliance with Rule 4A(2) and inadequate document submission. The authorized representative highlighted that the lower authorities were unable to make findings on the documents due to incomplete submission. After hearing both sides, the Tribunal noted that the denial of CENVAT credit was solely based on the lack of details in the letter as per Rule 4A(2). The appellant's advocate presented all details during the hearing, prompting the Tribunal to remand the matter to the adjudicating authority for further examination.

Consequently, the Tribunal remanded the case to the original adjudicating authority for a fresh decision based on the documents provided during the appeal. The appeal was allowed by setting aside the initial order, emphasizing the need for a detailed examination of the documents at the lower authority level. The decision highlighted the importance of complying with statutory requirements and providing complete documentation to support claims for input service tax credit.