Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding

🚨 Important Update for Our Users

We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.

⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025

If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please let us know via our feedback form so we can address them promptly.

  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2025 (7) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password



 

2025 (7) TMI 1207 - AT - Service Tax


ISSUES:

    Whether the denial of CENVAT Credit on "Pre-Assembly Platforms" and related items classified under Chapter Heading No. 73084000 is justified.Whether the items on which CENVAT Credit was availed qualify as "capital goods" under Rule 2(a) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.Whether the extended period of limitation for issuing the Show Cause Notice is applicable in the absence of suppression of facts or intent to avail irregular credit.Whether interest and penalty can be imposed when CENVAT Credit is rightly availed on eligible capital goods.

RULINGS / HOLDINGS:

    The goods procured, including Panel Assembly Platform, Coil Assembly Platform, Coil Lifting Fixture, Column Pre-Assembly Platform, Boiler Drum Lifting Gantry, Coil Welding Jhula, and lifting hooks, fall within the definition of "jigs and fixtures" under the definition of "capital goods" as per Rule 2(a) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.The appellant was entitled to avail CENVAT Credit on such capital goods used in providing taxable output services; hence, denial of credit was not justified.The invocation of the extended period of limitation is not sustainable as there was no suppression of facts or intent to avail irregular credit demonstrated by the appellant.Since the appellant was eligible to avail CENVAT Credit, the demand of interest and imposition of penalty do not arise and are accordingly set aside.

RATIONALE:

    The Court applied the definition of "capital goods" under Rule 2(a) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, which explicitly includes "jigs and fixtures" as capital goods eligible for credit.The Court relied on the classification of the goods under the Central Excise Tariff and the statutory framework governing CENVAT Credit to determine eligibility.The extended period of limitation under the relevant provisions requires proof of suppression of facts with intent; absence of such suppression negates the applicability of extended limitation.The Court's decision aligns with the principle that credit on capital goods used in taxable services is allowable, and penalties or interest cannot be imposed where credit is rightly availed.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates