Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Larsen & Toubro Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-II

2015 (11) TMI 207 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Availment of CENVAT Credit - invoices for the input service which were invoiced not in the name of the appellant but to the Divisions of L&T - interest under Section 11AB - penalty under Section 11AC - Held that:- whole case is revolving only on the aspect that invoices of services are not bearing the address of the appellant. However the name of the appellant is indeed mentioned in the invoices. I think on that basis alone it was wrongly concluded by the lower authority that in absence of addre .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lars made against the said invoices, it can be ascertained that service recipient is the appellant and nobody else. However these facts of accounting of bills in the books of account of the appellant and accounting of payment made by the appellant to the service recipient were not verified by the lower authority. In my considered view the matter deserves to be remand to the original authority for this limited purpose. I am of the considered view if it is found that against the disputed invoices, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

erintendent (A.R.) ORDER Per : Ramesh Nair This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. SK/278/M-II/2013-14 dtd. 23/10/2013 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals-II), Mumbai, wherein Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal filed by the appellant. 2. The facts of the case is that the appellant availed Cenvat Credit amounting to ₹ 13,69,842/- on the invoices for the input service which were invoiced not in the name of the appellant but to the Divisions of L& .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

re the Commissioner (Appeals), who rejected appeal of the appellant vide impugned order. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the appellant is before me. 3. Shri Prasad Paranjape, Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that Cenvat credit was denied only on the ground that the invoices for services which was received and used at the job worker place were bearing name of job worker, therefore authorities have presumed that the services are not received by the appellant. It is his submission that the fa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ause services were provided in the premises of the job worker, however the name of the appellant is clearly appearing on the service tax invoices. He submits that before the original authority as well as Commissioner (Appeals), appellant have categorically made statement and submitted that the services were received by the appellant, payment of such service, bills were made by the appellant to the service provider directly, so recipient of the services are the appellant and merely because the jo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

uring process of the appellant carried out by their job worker. Since the payment of service chargers and Service Tax was made by the appellant to the service provider, these facts constitute that services were received by the appellant and used in or in relation to the manufacturing of final product. In view of this fact merely because name of the job worker is appearing on the invoices, Cenvat Credit could not be denied to the appellant, particularly whin the name of Appellant is also appearin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

anjay Hasija, Ld. Superintendent (A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. He further submits that though the name of the appellant is bearing on the service invoices, services were provided in the premises of job worker. He submits that the company L&T Ltd. is having various units in all over India. Therefore by mention of name of the appellant it cannot be ascertained that service recipient is L&T Ltd. (Heavy Engineering division) i.e appe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

I think on that basis alone it was wrongly concluded by the lower authority that in absence of address it cannot be ascertained that the services provided and covered under the input services invoices were meant for the appellant. I observed that name of the appellant is clearly mentioned on the invoices alongwith name and the address of the job worker i.e. M/s. R&C, SBS Marg, Mulund has also mentioned. As per the submission of the appellant which they have been making before both lower aut .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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