TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 198X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s which have gone into exempted output services. Once the appropriate reversal have been made under Rule 6 (3A) of the Cenvat Credit Rules any procedural violations of minor nature would be of in-consequential nature and will not dis-entitle the assessee from availing the Cenvat credit of the common inputs for which they have already been making a regular reversal of proportionate credits - the Department has nowhere mentioned in entire proceedings that the amount of Cenvat credit reversed is not proportionate to the value of exempted services or not proper otherwise. The only ground that the appellant have not followed the laid down procedure of availing the option of Rule 6 (3A) like not declaring value of turnover of exempted services in their periodic service tax return etc. can be minor procedural lapses, but same cannot become ground for denying a substantial benefit to the appellant. Once the proportionate reversal of the Cenvat credit has taken place, that tantamount to not availing of the input services credit of the common inputs which are going into the exempted services - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Service Tax Appeal No. 51818 of 2015 - FI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 69/- 2012-13 (upto June) 10,99,80,901/- 6% 65,98,854/- Total 82,46,95,327/- 4,87,28,002/- The above referred show cause notice have been adjudicated by learned Commissioner vide his order-in-original No. JAI-EXCUS-000-COM-80-14-15 dated 29 January 2015. The learned Commissioner vide above-mentioned impugned order-in-original has confirmed the demand of service tax as demanded in the show cause notice and penalty of equal amount has already been imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 readwith Rule 15 (3) and Rule 15 (4) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The appellant are before us against the impugned order-in-original dated 29 January 2015. 2. The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant has submitted that appellant had availed the Cenvat credit during the period October 2008 to June 2012 according to Rule 6 (3A) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 by reversing the proportionate amount of Cenvat credit attributable to exempted services and utilized the remaining amount of the Cenvat credit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ration, suppression of facts etc. are not present in this matter and the appellant have already made a declaration to the Department that proportionate Cenvat credit of the inputs which are going into exempted services are being reversed by them on their own. The learned Advocate has relied on the Hon ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Chandrapur Magnets Pvt. Ltd. versus Commissioner of Central Excise 1996 (81) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.). In this judgment the Hon ble Apex court has held that once the Cenvat credit taken has been reversed back by the assessee, it amounts to as if no Cenvat credit was availed. The learned Advocate further stressed that decision of Chandrapur Magnets Pvt. Ltd. (supra) is regularly being followed by this Tribunal and some of the case laws cited by the learned Advocate are as follows :- (i) Commissioner of Central Excise versus Ashima Dyecot Ltd. 2008 (232) E.L.T. 580 (Guj.) (affirmed by the Hon ble Supreme Court in 2009 (240) E.L.T. A41 (S.C.) (ii) Hello Minerals Water (P) LOtd. Versus Union of India 2004 (174) E.L.T. 422 (All.) (iii) Oil India Limited versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur 2018 (6) TMI 1248 CESTAT New De ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent of Rule 6 (3) (ii) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 readwith Rule 6 (3A) and have been reversing the amount of common Cenvat credits, proportionate to value of exempted output services. In this regard we take note of the fact that appellant have furnished Cenvat credit register for the period April 2009 to June 2012 which indicate that they have regularly been reversing the proportionate amount of the Cenvat credit taken on the common inputs which have gone into exempted output services. In this regard, we are of the view once the appropriate reversal have been made under Rule 6 (3A) of the Cenvat Credit Rules any procedural violations of minor nature would be of in-consequential nature and will not dis-entitle the assessee from availing the Cenvat credit of the common inputs for which they have already been making a regular reversal of proportionate credits. We also take note of the fact that the Department has nowhere mentioned in entire proceedings that the amount of Cenvat credit reversed is not proportionate to the value of exempted services or not proper otherwise. The only ground that the appellant have not followed the laid down procedure of availing the option of Rule ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
