Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2022 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (11) TMI 97 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT Credit - input services - sale commission - whether commission agent is directly concerned with ‘sales’ rather than ‘sales promotion’ for which the same would not fall within the definition of input services? - effect of N/N. 2/2016-CE(NT) - contention of the Respondent-Department is that the said notification is prospective in nature while Appellant claims that being a beneficial provision, it is a clarification which is retrospective in nature and it covers the period of dispute of Appellant occurred post 2011 amendment. HELD THAT:- Learned Counsel for the Appellant Mr. Harish Bindumadhavan draws attention of this Bench to the decision rendered by this Tribunal in M/S ESSAR STEEL INDIA LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF C. EX. & SERVICE TAX, SURAT-I [2016 (4) TMI 232 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD] wherein by applying the ratio of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) -I, NEW DELHI VERSUS VATIKA TOWNSHIP PRIVATE LIMITED [2014 (9) TMI 576 - SUPREME COURT] it was held that explanation inserted in Rule 2(l) of Rules, 2004 that is in conformity to Board Circular dated 29.04.2011 extending benefit to the assessee would have retrospective effect. Thus, Appellant is eligible to avail credits on the tax paid on sale commission paid to both Indian and overseas agents for the period between April, 2013 and August, 2015 - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|