9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 767X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e capacity as a receiver of service in respect of service received from foreign commission agent during the period from 2003 to 2005. On being pointed out by the department, the appellant paid the service tax and took the cenvat credit of the same as a receiver of the service. Thereafter realising that there was no need to pay service tax as a receiver, appellant filed a refund claim which was all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dit had been taken wrongly. At the time when credit was taken it was taken correctly since service tax had been paid. When there was no wrongful availment of cenvat credit, just because it was reversed subsequently when refund was granted, it would not mean that credit had been wrongly availed. Therefore, appellant is not liable to pay service tax. On the other hand, ld. A R would submit that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al principle laid down cannot be said to be not applicable just because the service receiver and the provider happen to be one and the same. Further, I also find considerable force in the argument advanced by the ld. counsel that at the time when credit was taken it cannot be said that there was a wrongful availment. In any case, there is a question of interpretation of law involved and it would r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
