Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2018 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (10) TMI 28 - AT - Service TaxReversal of CENVAT Credit - providing services at concessional rate of service tax / abatement - common input services used for providing taxable as well as exempt service - non-maintenance of separate records - Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules - Held that:- The appellant is not providing any exempted service because his case does not fall in the definition of exempted service. However, the appellants are only availing the benefit of abatement in respect of the accommodation service as per Notification No.26/2012 dt. 20/06/2012 and as per the said Notification, 40% of the value of the accommodation service has been exempted from the levy of service tax on the condition that the CENVAT credit on inputs and capital goods has not been taken - In the present case, the appellant has not taken any CENVAT credit on inputs and capital goods. Further there is no restriction with respect to availment of CENVAT credit on input services. As far as restaurant services are concerned, it is found that the appellant is not availing the abatement notification and as per Rule 2C of Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, only 40% of the total value is taxable and the only condition attached with this is that CENVAT credit on inputs classified under Chapter 1 to 22 of the CETA, 1985 is not availed. When the statute itself prescribed certain percentage of total value as the value of service, the remaining portion of the value would neither be considered as an abatement nor as an exemption and consequently the restaurant services would not be covered under the definition of exempted services and hence the provisions of Rule 6 of CCR is not applicable in the present case. The appellants are not required to comply with the provisions of Rule 6 of CENVAT Credit Rules - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|