Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2015 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (9) TMI 821 - AT - Service TaxDenial of CENVAT Credit - input services - C&F Agent Service, Courier Services - credit has been disallowed to the appellant on the ground that cenvatable documents are not showing the registration number of the unit who is providing taxable services to the appellant - Held that:- So far as the admissibility of cenvat credit is concerned, the same is covered by the case law of this Bench in the appellant s own case of Meghmani Organics Limited vs. CCE, Ahmedabad (2011 (8) TMI 542 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD) and Meghachem Industries vs. CCE, Ahmedabad (2011 (4) TMI 221 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD), wherein it is held that cenvat credit of Courier Services and CHA up to the place of export are admissible. Appellant s case is therefore covered by the ratio laid down by this Bench and credit with respect to Courier Service and C&F Agent service, in relation to export is admissible. So far as denial of cenvat credit with respect to certain documents on which registration number of service provider was not indicated, it is observed that Respondent subsequently produced necessary certificates from the jurisdictional Central Excise authorities showing registration number of the service provider. As per the provisions contained in Rule 9(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, if documents does not contain all the particulars but contains details of service tax paid, description of taxable services etc. then the same can be got verified from the jurisdictional Central Excise officers. Further, the procedural irregularities cannot be made the basis for denying the cenvat credit. Accordingly, cenvat credit was admissible to the appellant on the issue of certain documents for which necessary registration number etc. were provided by the Respondent. - Decided against Revenue.
|