9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 486X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 place. He also drew attention to the sample invoices. He also contended that the authorities below have only considered the decisions but not the C.B.I.C. instructions (supra) which is very relevant as in respect of the delivery, the agreement is on 'FOR' destination basis only. 2.2 With regard to the invoices being addressed to Corporate Office, he contended that there is no service received ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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. (iii) Hotel stay: Ld. AR submits that the identity of the visit of the technician vis-à-vis a particular unit, is not established, which is a condition precedent. (iv) Auction Services: It is her case that the scrap generated is as good as an exempted good or in the nature of a by-product and hence, justifies the disallowance by the authorities. 3.2 With regard to re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 centralized Service Tax Registration for all the units, including their registered office. They did not obtain the Input Service Distributor (ISD) Registration, which according to them was only a procedural lapse and that it has also been held that such registration is not mandatory by various judicial fora. They have also asserted that they had availed input credit only at t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 denial is not proper and is only on assumptions. Accordingly, I set aside the impugned order even to this extent. This ground-of-appeal is accordingly allowed. IV. CENVAT Credit on Auction Services: (i) Both the authorities below have denied the CENVAT Credit holding that the above service is a post manufacturing activity. In effect, it only means that the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
