9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1187X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eriod April to September 2004 in respect of service tax credit amounting to Rs. 62,61,059/- availed during the said half year. Noticing that the appellant did not file the required statutory return in form ST-3 as per Rule 7 of Service Tax Rules, 1994 proceedings were initiated against them to deny the said credit. The appellant did file the return later and the impugned order held that the credits availed were not admissible due to various shortcomings noticed with reference to said credits. The relevant finding of the Original Authority is as below :- "5.9 On perusal of the notice, I find that the Noticee has not submitted any returns before the jurisdictional Superintendent, as prescribed under sub-Rule (4) of erstwhile Service Tax Cre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring output services. I also find that the Noticee has taken credit in respect of some of the input services prior to 14th May, 2003, which are not falling in the same category of taxable services as that of output services in violation of Rule 3 (1) (b) of erstwhile Service Tax Credit Rules, 2002. Further, I find that the Noticee has not provided any records for verification in which the relevant information regarding the Sl. No. and date of documents on which service tax credit availed and also copies of Invoices/Bills/ challans etc. showing the payment of service tax thereon. Thus I find that the Noticee has taken input service credit, which are not actually consumed by them in relation to rendering taxable output services. Further they ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Original Authority passed an order which is neither legally nor factually sustainable. The learned Counsel contested the order for imposing of penalty also. 4. We have heard both the sides and perused the appeal record. The learned AR supported the findings of the Original Authority mainly on the ground that the appellant did not come forward by providing all the documentary evidences which will support their claim for such input service credits. We note that the initial proceedings against the appellant was only for nonfiling of returns and thereupon proposal was made to deny the credit. However, based on the return filed and the details provided by the appellant during the proceedings, the Original Authority came to the above conclusio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
