TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1237X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d on import of services under the reverse charge mechanism on the basis of ST challans in accordance with the provisions of Rule 9(1)(e) which allows the assessee to take CENVAT credit on the basis of challan in case of reverse charge mechanism - Both the authorities have wrongly denied the CENVAT credit by invoking Rule 9(1)(bb) which is not applicable in the present case. Tribunal in the case of Polygenta Technology Ltd. [2018 (2) TMI 804 - CESTAT, MUMBAI], the Mumbai Bench of CESTAT on an identical facts has held that The appellant is paying service tax on reverse charge basis in terms of Rule 2(1)(d) of Service Tax Rules, 1994 and therefore credit can be availed in terms of Rule 9(i)(e) of CCR. Refund allowed - appeal allowed - d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es also. They have filed a refund claim amounting to ₹ 5,93,753/- for accumulated and unutilized CENVAT credit availed on input services used to provide output services which were exported for the period from July 2014 to September 2014 in terms of Notification No.27/2012-CE (NT) dated 18.6.2012 issued under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. On scrutiny of the refund claim, a show-cause notice was issued alleging that the appellant is not eligible to avail CENVAT credit on service tax paid on import of services under Reverse Charge Mechanism and payment of service tax has been made in the subsequent quarter. It was alleged that the amount of tax paid by the appellant was not eligible for credit as the same was paid based on au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... long with interest. For this submission, he relied upon the following decisions: (i) J.P.P. Mills Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE: 2016 (46) STR 317 (Tri.-Chennai) (ii) CCE, Salem vs. JSW Steels Ltd.: 2018 (8) GSTL 153 (Mad.) (iii) Polygenta Technologies Ltd. vs. CCE, Nasik-I: 2018 (2) TMI 804 CESTAT-MUMBAI 5.1 He further submitted that this Tribunal in the case Polygenta Technologies Ltd. (supra) wherein an identical issue was involved. The Tribunal after considering the Rule 9(1)(bb) and Rule 9(1)(e) of CENVAT Credit Rules has held that credit cannot be denied. 6. On the other hand, the learned AR defended the impugned order. 7. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
