TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1008X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at:- The jurisdictional High Court of Karnataka in the case of M/s. Aravind Fashions [2011 (9) TMI 852 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] observed that Order of the Tribunal sustained in which it was held that prior to 19.4.2006 recipient of services who was liable to pay service tax was entitled to avail cenvat credit for the purpose of making payment of service tax on import of services. Utilization of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rvices are not output services and the appellants were merely discharging the applicable service tax on behalf of the service providers in terms of provisions of Rule 2(1)(d)(iv) and Rule 2(d)(v)(a) of Central Excise Rules, 1994. The appellants are availing credit of duty paid on inputs, input service and the capital goods. The Department alleged that the appellants cannot avail CENVAT credit for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e order, the appellants have preferred the present appeal. 2. The learned counsel for the appellants has pleaded that Section 66A, Section 68(2) of the Finance Act, 1994 and Service Tax Rules, and the definitions thereof have been interpreted by the High Courts and the Tribunal to encompass the eligibility to utilize credit to discharge service tax liability by a deemed service provider under r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted that the demands may be set aside. 3. The Departmental Representative has reiterated the findings of the Order-in-Original and has relied upon Chennai Tribunal s decision rendered in the case of Alstom Project India Ltd.: 2008 (12) STR 23, wherein it was held that input service tax credit not available to be utilized for payment of tax on GTA, which is also an input service. 4. Heard ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with him and therefore, the Tribunal was justified in interfering with the order passed by the Commissioner. Similar view was held by this High Court of Karnataka in the case of Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd. (supra). We find that this case was upheld by the Hon ble Supreme Court in 2017 (52) STR J79 (SC). In view of the above discussions and by following the ratio of the above judgments, we al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
