TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 324X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed upon him in terms of Section 66A. In terms of Rule 2(r), the appellant is a deemed service provider. Rule 5 of Taxation of Services (Provided from outside India and received in India) Rules only refer to availing of CENVAT credit and not utilization of CENVAT credit. Before 20/06/2012 there was no restriction upon the deemed service provider to pay the service tax liability from CENVAT credit. The Tribunal in the case of Kansara Modler Ltd. Vs. CCE, Jaipur-II [2014 (1) TMI 1095 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] has allowed the utilization of credit. Extended period od limitation - Held that:- The period involved is 30/09/2011 to 30/07/2012 and the show-cause notice was issued on 22/05/2004 which is beyond the normal period prescribed under Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate on which the debit entry in the books of accounts of the person receiving the service is made. As per the provisions of Rule 3(4) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, CENVAT credit cannot be used for payment of service tax in respect of services where the person liable to pay tax is the service recipient. Hence it was alleged that the payment of service tax was to be made in cash only and not from credit account was done by the appellant on 30/05/2012 and 31/08/2012. The appellant agreed and paid ₹ 32,52,852/- in cash on 28/11/2012. Department argued that there was delay in payment of the service tax under reverse charge mechanism. The interest of R.4,35,511/- was not paid. Notice dt. 22/05/2014 issued proposing to appropriate the am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 012 and their transaction was from 30/09/2011 to 31/07/2012. He further submitted that the entire demand is time barred. He further submitted that the demand in the present case is for the period from 30/09/2011 to 31/07/2012 and the show-cause notice was issued on 22/05/2014 which is beyond the normal period as prescribed under the provisions of Section 73 of the Finance Act. He further submitted that the Commissioner(Appeals) has observed in the impugned order that there is no suppression of facts nor any intention to evade the payment of tax and hence the liability for larger period cannot be confirmed. He further submitted that the issue involved in the present case is no more res integra and has been settled by various decisions o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edit. The Tribunal in the case of Kansara Modler Ltd. Vs. CCE, Jaipur-II [2014(1) TMI 1095- CESTAT New Delhi] has allowed the utilization of credit. Further I find that in the case of Toyota Kirlosakar Motor Pvt. Ltd., the Division Bench of this Tribunal in an identical issue by relying upon the judgment of the High Court of Karnataka, has allowed the payment of service tax through CENVAT credit. It is pertinent to reproduce para 4 of the said order. 4. Heard both sides and have perused the records. The precise issue to be decided in this case is whether the CENVAT credit availed by the appellants can be utilized towards the payment of input service paid on the basis of reverse charge mechanism. We find that there are different views ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
