TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 436X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... credit and the appellant had not utilized that credit in excess of the 20% of the credit taken there will not be any liability to reverse only excess credit taken. For the period 2008-09 to 2010-11, the appellant s contention is that they have maintained separate accounts and the ineligible credit taken by them would be only ₹ 5.81 lakhs. This is a question of fact and needs to be verified by the department. - Matter remanded back conditionally - Application disposed of. - Application No. ST/S/97897/13 in Appeal No. ST/88659/13, And Appeal No. ST/88659/13 - - - Dated:- 25-8-2014 - Mr. P. R. Chandrasekharan And Mr. Ramesh Nair,JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. K. S. Mishra, Additional Commissioner (AR)) For the Respondent : No ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the actual utilization of credit in excess of 20% limit occurred only in the months of June, September and December 2007 and March 2008 whereas in the other months they had utilized Cenvat credit less than the limit of 20%. If one sees the overall availment from April 2006 to March 2008, the total credit that could be utilized was ₹ 43,17,409 (being 20% of credit availed). As against this they have, in fact, utilized a credit of only ₹ 40,99,690/- which is well below the limit of 20% of the limit. The learned consultant placed reliance on the decisions of this Tribunal in the case of Vijayanand Roadlines Ltd vs CCE, Belgaum - reported in 2007 (7) STR 219 (Tri-Bang) and Idea Cellular Ltd vs CCE, Rohtak reported in 2009 (16) STR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... adjudicating authority in his order has clearly recorded a finding that the appellant has not maintained separate accounts in respect of availment of credit on input services used in exempted as well as taxable services and no evidence has been led by the appellant before the said authority. Therefore, the adjudicating authority was right in confirming a demand at the rate of 8% of the value of the exempted services. Accordingly he prays that the appellants to be put to terms. 6. We have considered the submissions made by both sides. 7. As the issue lies in a narrow compass we are of the view that the appeal itself can be disposed of at the stay stage. Therefore, we take up the appeal for consideration and disposal. 8. As regards ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
