Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (11) TMI 21 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

2016 (11) TMI 21 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD - TMI - Connivance with service provider for evasion of service tax - availing inadmissible CENVAT credit - Manpower or Supply Agency Services - Extended period of limitation - demand of duty with interest - imposition of penalty - Held that: - the Show Cause Notice did not bring forward any evidence to establish that there has been collusion between the appellant and the service provider for evasion of Service Tax and for availing inadmissible Cenvat credit. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t of ₹ 3,32,76,600/- is set aside, order for recovery of interest on the said demand is set aside, imposition of penalties set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - APPEAL No. E/52221 & 52222/2014-EX[DB] - Final Order No. 71003-71004/2016 - Dated:- 3-10-2016 - Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri Atul Gupta, Advocate & Shri Hrishikesh, Advocate, for Appellant Shri Rajeev Ranjan, Joint Commissioner (AR), for Respon .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ing Cenvat Facility. The appellants enter into an agreement of 1st March, 2008 with M/s BVI HR Practice Private Limited for supply of Manpower . In the said agreement the appellant inserted a clause that BVI shall obtain various license/registration service etc. required under the Income Tax law applicable on the type of services rendered by them, such as Service Tax and that BVI shall ensure timely and correct payment of tax applicable from time to time and that Service Tax shall be charged on .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ayment of Service Tax stated on the invoices issued to the appellant. Investigation was carried out and a Show Cause Notice was issued to the appellant who was recipient of service, as to why, Cenvat credit amounting to ₹ 3,32,76,600/- wrongly availed during the period from April, 2007 to March, 2009 should not be recovered from them under the provisions of Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11A(4) of Central Excise Act, 1944. There was a proposal to impose personal pen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed for evasion of Service Tax and for availing inadmissible Cenvat credit and as a result extended period was invoked for issue of Show Cause Notice. The Show Cause Notice was issued on 09-05-2012 for the period from April, 2007 to March, 2009. 3. Appellants submitted before the Original Authority that the invoices issued by M/s BVI HR Practice Private Limited were containing all the particulars prescribed under Rule 4(A) of Central Excise Act, 1944 and that appellants paid Service Tax to M/s BV .....

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 appellants and the invoices were in compliance with provisions of Rule 4A of Service Tax Rules, 1994 and this is how the document was in conformity with the provisions of Sub-rule 1 of Rule 9 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. They have further submitted that as provided under Sub-rule 7 of Rule of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 which provides that credit on input services can be availed once payment has been made on the full value of the service including Service Tax and this is how they were eligible .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

as well as Service Tax collected but not deposited with the exchequer and it is not the responsibility of the service receiver to ensure payment of Service Tax by service provider. They have further contended that the extended period of limitation was not admissible to be invoked in the present Show Cause Notice though the allegation was made on the Show Cause Notice that is connivance of the appellant with the service provider but such an allegation has not been supported by any evidence. The .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

appellant Company. Aggrieved by the said Order-in-Original No. 48-52/Commissioner/Noida/2013-14 dated 29/01/2014, the appellant is before this Tribunal. The grounds of appeal are same as that were stated before the Original Authority. 4. The ld. Counsel for the appellants reiterated the grounds. He has further relied on the ruling by Hon ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax Versus Juhi Alloys Ltd. reported at 2014 (302) E.L.T. 487 (Allahaba .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

le steps have been taken as required within the meaning of Rule 9(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 it would be contrary to the Rules to casting an impossible or impractical burden of going on the assessee issuing invoices to verify his records. He has further relied on ruling by the Hon ble High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, East Singhbhum Versus Tata Motors Ltd. reported at 2013 (294) E.L.T. 394 (Jharkhand). It was submitted that the Hon ble High Cou .....

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