New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (8) TMI 109 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2015 (8) TMI 109 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - 2015 (40) S.T.R. 621 (Tri. - Del.) - Denial of CENVAT Credit - input services - professional / legal services - the services relating to this amount were provided at the premises of M/s. HCL Comnet Systems and Service, USA, which is not registered premises in India - Held that:- permanent establishment in US is not a legal entity and is merely an office of the appellants. The onus to fulfil the legal requirement relating to that office clearly rests on the a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to the appellants' office in the US. Thus the impugned service tax amount is clearly in respect of input service availed by them. - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. ST/57935/2013-ST[SM] - Final Order No. A/51207/2015-SM(BR) - Dated:- 10-4-2015 - R K Singh, Member (T),J. For the Appellants : Ms Rajni Gupta & Ms Nupur Maheshwari, Advs. For the Respondent : Shri G R Singh, DR ORDER Per: R K Singh: Appeal has been filed against Order-in-Appeal No.400/ST/APPL/Noida/2012, dated 26.12.20 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

therefore the refund of CENVAT credit involved in such invoices amounting to ₹ 2,35,981/-was not admissible". The appellate authority upheld the primary order essentially on the following grounds:- "4.3 The appellants in their appeal submitted that the service is covered under the definition of 'Input Service' and the refund cannot be denied on the grounds that the service was provided a copy of a sample invoice no. IINL0100099653 dated 14.04.2011; on it's perusal it .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

spect of the registered establishments of the appellant. Hence, I found that the service was neither consumed/utilized by the appellants in their registered premises nor it was consumed/utilized in relation to provision of output service. Albeit, it was utilized in respect of an establishment in USA. In the present case the appellant is not the recipient of the service. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the appellants are not entitled to avail Cenvat credit as well as refund thereof. As the ap .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he services of M/s. Ernst & Young Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon for submitting such returns and on the basis of the invoices of M/s. Ernst & Young Pvt. Ltd. which were raised on them (i.e., Appellants, Gurgaon), they took Cenvat credit of the service tax indicated therein as it was input service and therefore the impugned refund is admissible. They also contended that their permanent establishment in the US does not have a separate legal persona and is just an office of theirs. Ld. Departmental Rep .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version