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 548 - AT - Service TaxCENVAT Credit of CVD paid - capital goods/inputs used for providing output services - import of chassis on payment of applicable customs duty, procured kit buckets, cylinders etc. and other body building material and assembled the same at their site as tippers and dumpers and used the same for the purpose of transportation of overburden - denial of credit on the ground that these vehicles are motor vehicles and cannot be considered as capital goods or inputs - Held that:- Identical issue decided in the case of GANTA RAMANAIAH NAIDU VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, GUNTUR [2009 (9) TMI 261 - CESTAT, BANGALORE], where it was held that duty paid on motor vehicles cannot be considered as eligible CENVAT credit under capital goods or under inputs - credit rightly denied. CENVAT Credit - duty paying documents - invalid documents - Held that:- The issue needs reconsideration by the adjudicating authority as random sample documents produced before us indicate that appellant may be able to justify their contention that they are eligible for the CENVAT credit - matter on remand. As regards CENVAT credit availed in excess of 50% of the capital goods of an amount of ₹ 29,08,122/- there are no merits in the contentions raised by the learned counsel that this amount is included in the amount of CENVAT credit denied and is upheld. CENVAT credit of cess availed by the appellant - Held that:- On perusal of CENVAT Credit rules, it is found that it does not contemplate for availment of CENVAT credit of motor vehicle cess - demand upheld. Confiscation of tippers and spare parts - Redemption fine - Held that:- Such confiscation is unwarranted as the appellant during the relevant period may have entertained a bonafide belief that since the said tippers after assembly were used for rendering taxable output service, they are eligible for CENVAT credit - confiscation and redemption fine set aside. Penalty u/r 15 - Held that:- There could be a bonafide impression that any inputs or input services or capital goods used for providing output services were eligible for CENVAT credit, which was an industry norm and had to be decided by the Tribunal in the case of Ganta Ramanaiah Naidu - issue being contentional, penalty not warranted. Appeal allowed in part.
|