TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 963X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... actory, they had taken only 50% of the credit in the year of receipt and the balance 50% was taken only in the next financial year - further, the credit was taken but not utilised - relying upon the decision of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Commissioner vs. Bill Forge PVt. Ltd. [2011 (4) TMI 969 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT], the appellant are not liable to pay interest and penalty. CENVAT credit - duty paying documents - input services - denial on the ground that in the bill, service tax registration is not mentioned and further some of the bills are not in the prescribed format - Held that: - excepting the service tax registration number all other details have been given in the bills - even certificate of service tax registration ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Rule 4 (2) of Cenvat Credit Rules 2002 that during August 2008, they had availed 100% credit of capital goods on the basis of invoices received from Unit-II towards transfer of capital goods Credit under Rule 3 (5) of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 since as per Rules they should have taken only 50% of the Capital goods Credit; they had availed excess credit of ₹ 15,32,821/-, education cess of ₹ 23,040/-, secondary and higher education cess of ₹ 14,469/- and that they are therefore liable to pay interest of ₹ 1,35,350/-; that they had taken 100% credit on investment casting dies received from M/s. Satyay Tehnocast (P) Ltd., Rajkot, treating it as input making them liable to pay interest of ₹ 1,908/-; that they had t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taking credit. He also submitted that the appellant has filed a certified copy of bill of entry which should be accepted as a proper bill of entry for the purpose of availing Cenvat credit. Further, in respect of issue of credit on input services, it was submitted by the Learned Counsel that if the transaction is bonafide, then the credit cannot be denied even if the duty paying documents are lacking in certain particulars. 5. On the other hand, the Learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order and submitted that the appellant had wrongly taken 100% credit during the year of receipt of capital goods in contravention of Rule 4 (2) (a) of Cenvat Credit 2004. He further submitted that with regard to input services credit has been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been denied with regard to input services on the ground that in the bill, service tax registration is not mentioned and further some of the bills are not in the prescribed format. In this regard, I have perused the bills of service providers excepting the service tax registration number all other details have been given in the bills. Further, I also find that even certificate of service tax registration has also been placed on record which shows that the service provider had the service tax registration at the time when the input service was provided to the appellant. Further, I find that in case of Standard Electrical Ltd. Vs. CCE - 2002 (147) ELT 233 (Tri.-Del), it has been held as under: Invoice containing essential particulars ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
