Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2016 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (6) TMI 199 - AT - Service TaxAdmissibility of Cenvat credit - service tax paid on the taxable service used for procurement of plant but not for installation - Held that:- services were so integrally connected with the plant and commissioning thereof erecting at the site, that cannot be ruled out. Services were utilised for erection and commissioning of the plant. The indispensable nature of the services is appreciable from the description provided in the SCN itself. That cannot be ruled out. Period of limitation - Held that:- the element of suppression and fraud should have "intention to evade" but that is not present in the SCN. In absence of allegation in that behalf, there is no foundation in the SCN to allege in adjudication order. This can be said following the Apex Court judgment in the case of Continental Foundation Jt. Venture Vs CCE Chandigarh-I [2007 (8) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA]. So also, when mala fide is not patent from record, the appellant also gets the benefit of the Apex Court judgement in the case of Uniworth Textiles Ltd. Vs CCE Raipur [2013 (1) TMI 616 - SUPREME COURT]. As a result, both on merit as well as on limitation, appellant succeeds. Imposition of penalty - Held that:- appellant says that tax element has been paid and he will instruct his client to discharge the interest element, if any, on the service tax demand of ₹ 4,94,400/-. Upon compliance of interest payment within a month of receipt of this order, there shall be no penalty at all. - Decided in favour of appellant
|