TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 175X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ents to adjust their dues pending with the service provider and paying the service tax on behalf of the service provider. The letter dated 21.12.2016 issued by the service provider (BPS) to appellant would establish that they have paid the service tax on behalf of BPS after adjusting all the pending dues between parties. Thus, it is very much clear from the facts that the appellant has paid the service tax at the time of paying the service charges - Merely because the service provider failed to deposit the same with the Government, the credit cannot be denied at the end of the service recipient. The Tribunal in the case of M/S LG ELECTRONICS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, BHARAT BHUSHAN SHARMA MANAGER VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE SERV ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the amount in their name, they have paid an amount of ₹ 6,26,494/- towards service tax and ₹ 2,60,782/- towards interest on behalf of BPS. The department was of the view that as per Rule 9(1)(bb) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, the challan for availing the credit is not a valid document as the amount was not paid by BPS to the Government and it amounted to suppression of facts with intent to evade payment of duty by the service provider namely BPS. Show Cause Notice was issued to the appellant proposing to demand an amount of ₹ 6,26,494/- along with interest and for imposing penalty. After due process of law, the original authority confirmed the demand along with interest and imposed penalty. In appeal, Commissioner (Appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on Rule 9(1)(bb) of CENVAT Credit Rules and explained that when the credit has been availed on the invoices for which the service provider has evaded payment of service tax by suppression of facts, the service recipient is not eligible to take credit. In the present case, it is clear that the service provider has not paid the service tax to the Government since the appellants have sought to pay the amount at a later stage. Thus, while taking credit the amount was not deposited to the Government and therefore the authorities below have rightly disallowed the credit. 4. Heard both sides. 5. On perusal of the facts, it is seen that the appellant has paid the service tax to the service provider along with service c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
