Tax Management India. Com
                        Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...

Category of Documents

TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms Manuals SMS News Articles
Highlights
D. Forum
What's New

Share:      

        Home        
 

TMI Blog

Home

2019 (8) TMI 486

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... RSUS M/S ROOFIT INDUSTRIES LTD. [2015 (4) TMI 857 - SUPREME COURT] to consider the plea of the appellant that the sale was on ‘FOR’ destination basis - Matter on remand. Invoices addressed to Corporate Office - HELD THAT:- The registration as ISD is not mandatory, which is evident from the C.B.E.C. Circular No. 1063/2/2018-CX dated 16.02.2018 wherein the Board has accepted the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE VERSUS DASHION LTD [2016 (2) TMI 183 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] wherein it has been held that non-registration of ISD is only a procedural irregularity, for which reason the benefit of CENVAT Credit cannot be denied to the assessee - Credit cannot be denied on this .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . S.S. Muralidharan, Chief Financial Officer for the Appellant Ms. T. Usha Devi, Authorized Representative for the Respondent ORDER By this appeal, the appellant has challenged the denial of CENVAT Credit in respect of the following : (i) Credit availed on GTA Services; (ii) Invoices addressed to Corporate Office; (iii) Credit availed on Hotel stay; and (iv) Credit availed on Auction Services; 2.1 Shri. S.S. Muralidharan, Chief Financial Officer (CFO) appearing for the appellant, submitted at the outset that with regard to the denial of credit on GTA Services, the authorities below have not considered the C.B.I.C. Circular No. 1065/4/2018-CX dated 08.06.2018 because in the case on hand, according to him, the delivery is at the customer s pl .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... revenue neutral with absolutely no loss to the Revenue. 3.1 Per contra, Ms. T. Usha Devi, Ld. AR appearing for the Revenue, seriously rebutting the contentions of the appellant, submitted as under : (i) GTA Services: Primarily, the Adjudicating Authority did not have the benefit of the C.B.I.C. instructions (supra) which was issued three months after the passing of the adjudication order. In any case, the appellant has not established its ownership till the delivery or the risks attached to the delivery, as specified at paragraph 4 of the above Circular. (ii) Invoice addressed to Corporate Office: The appellant has not satisfied Rule 7 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 wherein the procedure has been laid for distribution of credit by an ISD .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mp; C.Ex., Aurangabad Vs. M/s. Roofit Industries Ltd. reported in 2015 (319) E.L.T. 221 (S.C.), to consider the plea of the appellant that the sale was on FOR destination basis. (ii) Therefore, the Adjudicating Authority shall afford opportunities to the appellant on this, ascertain actual facts and then give a finding after considering the decisions of the Hon ble Supreme Court as also the C.B.I.C. Circular (supra). II. Invoices addressed to Corporate Office: (i) The appellant had, right from the stage of reply to the Show Cause Notice, taken the stand that it has three operating units with separate Central Excise Registration and that there was only one Corporate Office where no official activities take place. But however, they have centr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ant for the appellant, such technicians were needed only in case of requirement and that they were provided accommodation only for that limited purpose. This, according to him, is directly connected in relation to the manufacturing activity, though not in the activity of manufacture per se. (ii) This, according to me, deserves credit. The First Appellate Authority has not referred to or relied on any piece of evidence as to his observation that when the services are used primarily for personal consumption of any employee, then such input credit on such services is not an eligible credit and nor is it the case of Adjudicating Authority that the same were used for the personal consumption of any employee. Therefore, according to me, the denia .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 08.2017 - CESTAT New Delhi; c. National Engineering Industries Ltd. Vs. C.C.E. & S.T., Jaipur-I - Excise Appeal No. 53650 of 2015 vide Final Order No. 57218/2017 dated 10.10.2017 - CESTAT New Delhi; (iii) Going by the above, I find that the definition of Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 (amended) covers commission paid on sales promotion as well, which is in relation to the manufacturing activity. Hence, the CENVAT Credit availed on Auctioneer Services in the case on hand also deserves credit, more so because the sale by auction has suffered Central Excise Duty as well as VAT. It is also an admitted position that even the registered auctioneer has remitted Service Tax on the commission it received from the appellant. (iv) For .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || Database || Members || Refer Us ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.
|| Site Map - Recent || Site Map ||