Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2020 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (4) TMI 42 - AT - Service TaxRecovery of CENVAT Credit along with interest and penalty - admissibility of CENVAT Credit availed by the Appellant for providing the output service of ‘renting of immovable property’ - inputs, input services and capital goods used in the construction of the Hall for providing RIP service - Period of dispute from 1 April, 2007 to 31 March, 2010 - HELD THAT:- The issue as to whether the CENVAT Credit availed for the construction of a Mall and subsequent renting has been considered time and again by the High Courts and the Tribunal - reliance can be placed in the case of Dymos India Automotive [2018 (9) TMI 1135 - MADRAS HIGH COURT ], Navaratna S.G. Highway [2012 (7) TMI 316 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD ] and Vodafone Mobile Services 2018 (11) TMI 713 - DELHI HIGH COURT. In view of the aforesaid decisions of the High Courts, there is no manner of doubt that CENVAT Credit availed by the appellant on inputs, inputs services and capital goods service used for construction of the Mall, which was ultimately let out could not have been denied to the appellant. The findings to the contrary recorded by the Commissioner cannot be sustained and are, accordingly, set aside. Interpretation of statute - HELD THAT:- It clearly transpires from the reply filed by the appellant as also from the documents enclosed in the appeal that even though the period in dispute may be from 1 April, 2011 to 31 March, 2012, but the ‘input services’ were received by the appellant prior to 1 April, 2011 - The clarification contained in the Circular dated 29 April, 2011, clarifies that credit on such service shall be available if its provision had been completed before 01.04.2011 - thus, CENVAT Credit could not have been denied to the appellant for this reason. Impugned order do not sustain - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|