Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2022 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (3) TMI 1215 - AT - Service TaxCENVAT Credit - rendering both taxable as well as exempted services - cutting of hot rolled / cold rolled coils into sheets on job work basis - non-maintenance of separate records - invocation of rule 6 of CCR - HELD THAT:- Admittedly, it is not the case of the Revenue that no tax/duty is paid. From the perusal of the impugned Order-in-Appeal as well as Order-in-Original, it is found that the authorities below have not made any efforts to analyse the services provided by the appellant vis-à-vis Rule 2(e), to buttress their contention that what the appellant was doing would or would not fall under the definitions of Rule 2(e). Just because the appellant is not paying the tax/duty, that by itself would not be termed as “exempted services”. The statute has clearly defined “exempted services” to mean those which are exempted from the whole of service tax which would include those services on which no service tax is leviable under Section 66 of the Finance Act and until or unless the above conditions are satisfied, anything or everything cannot brought within the purview of exempted services. When the appellant claims right from the beginning that insofar as job work issue was concerned, the applicable duty/tax was paid by the principal manufacturer, no attempt was made to disprove the same by the revenue, they simply went on the premeditated misconception that the job work on which the appellant was not paying taxes, was an exempt service. This is without any basis which cannot be sustained. Scope of Rule 6 therefore is to be of limited applicability in such a scenario, as held by the Learned larger Bench of CESTAT in the case of STERLITE INDUSTRIES (I) LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE [2004 (12) TMI 108 - CESTAT, MUMBAI], which order was later-on approved by the Hon’ble Mumbai High Court, COMMISSIONER VERSUS STERLITE INDUSTRIES (I) LTD. [2008 (8) TMI 783 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT]. This very decision has been followed in a number of cases by various benches and hence, this issue does not require any further deliberations. The demands raised are contrary to law and hence, the same are set aside, being unsustainable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|