TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 612X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the year 2011 Major portion of the demand is beyond normal period. Further in the reply to SCN itself, the appellant has furnished all details with regard to the credit availed by them and also clarified the short comings in the documents. The department does not have a case that the credit is otherwise not eligible to the appellants. So also there is no case for the department that appellant has not properly accounted for the credit availed by them - The appellant succeeds both on merits as well as on limitation - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ST/21152/2015 - A/30159/2017 - Dated:- 3-2-2017 - Ms. Sulekha Beevi, C.S., Member (Judicial) Ms. A.S.K. Swetha, Advocate for the Appellant. Sh. Nagraj Naik, Deputy C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oices were introduced in the Service Tax Rules, 1994 only in 2011. There was an omission to mention the registration number in the invoice by the service providers. That this cannot be a ground to allege intention to evade payment of service tax. The show cause notice issued invoking the extended period is therefore not sustainable. She relied upon the judgments laid in the case of M/s Emmes Metals Pvt Ltd. Vs. CCE, Mumbai [2016 (5) TMl 1046 CESTAT-Mum] to contend that credit is admissible on debit notes. That Rule 9 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 provides that in case the documents do not contain necessary details the concerned Assistant Commissioner/Deputy Commissioner has to verify the same and allow the credit. That the appellants hav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... omings in the documents. The department does not have a case that the credit is otherwise not eligible to the appellants. So also there is no case for the department that appellant has not properly accounted for the credit availed by them. In the judgment laid in Imagination Technologies India Pvt Ltd. Vs CCE, Pune-III [2011 (23) STR 661 (Tri-Mum)] the Tribunal has held that credit cannot be denied for the reason that the duty paying documents does not contain the registration number of input service provider. The relevant paragraph reads as follows: As regards the second issue regarding denial of CENVAT Credit on account of not indicating registration number of the input service provider on the invoices, this issue also has been se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
