Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2024 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (3) TMI 239 - AT - Service TaxCENVAT Credit - input services, also utilized for trading (sale of cars) which is not a taxable output service - common input services - invocation of extended period of limitation - October 2007 to March 2011 - HELD THAT:- The issue in the present appeal is no more res integra and was considered by the Hon’ble Telangana High Court in the case of M/S TIARA ADVERTISING VERSUS UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE [2019 (10) TMI 27 - TELANGANA AND ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] where it was held that the second respondent did not choose to exercise power under this Rule but relied upon Rule 6(3)(i) and made the choice of the option thereunder for the petitioner, viz., to pay 5%/6% of the value of the exempted services. The statutory scheme did not vest the second respondent with the power of making such a choice on behalf of the petitioner. The Order-in-Original, to the extent that it proceeded on these lines, therefore cannot be countenanced. The Tribunal in the case of M/S. INGERSOLL-RAND TECHNOLOGIES AND SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE, GHAZIABAD [2022 (8) TMI 877 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD] have held that for not exercising the option under Rule 6 of the Credit Rules, the option of payment of 5/6% of trading of goods (‘exempted service’) cannot be thrust upon the appellant. It is not necessary to examine the contention advanced by the learned counsel for the Appellant regarding invocation of the extended period of limitation. The impugned order cannot be sustained and accordingly the same is set aside - Appeal allowed.
|