TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 1809X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant, along with the service tax - The Court below has observed in the impugned order, that had the appellant taken registration as an ISD distributor, the credit taken for the other centre, at the Jaipur office, service tax would not be attracted. Admittedly, for procedural deficiency, it has been held in several cases that the substantial benefit of the Cenvat credit provision, should not be denied. Revenue Neutrality - HELD THAT:- The situation is wholly Revenue neutral as all the four centres had paid service tax, also in cash and the Cenvat credit could have been distributed and thus availed by the other centres, and hence no gain. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ST/53597 & 51359/2018-SM - Final Order Nos. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r all business through Jaipur office only. 4. During the period for April, 2012 to September, 2014, departmental audit was conducted at Jaipur on appellant wherein through IAR Report it was objected by the audit team that appellant have wrongly availed Cenvat credit of service tax without receiving input services, i.e. service tax charged on services which were availed by other branch of assessee, who are separately registered as output service providers. It was also alleged that some Cenvat credit has been taken on the strength of improper documents. The IAR para was raised for ₹ 9,73,591/-. 5. During the period under dispute the appellant had four FM Radio stations which were located at Jaipur, Kota, Udaipur and Bhopal. The ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat since appellant is separately registered at Kota, hence it cannot avail Cenvat credit on strength of invoices which bears the address of some other office of the assessee. Hence, SCN was issued for the period of April, 2007 to March, 2011 for ₹ 9,80,605/- to reverse the Cenvat credit availed at Kota, for invoices on which address of Jaipur Office was mentioned. 9. On the basis of such show cause notice issued by the department as advised, with effect from April, 2012, the appellant changed its practice of availing Cenvat credit and started availing Cenvat credit of input services only at such office, addresses of which was mentioned in the respective invoices. 10. The appellant has throughout, only availed Cenvat credit at J ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant contested the show cause notices and the same were adjudicated vide separate Order-in-Original, the proposed demands were confirmed along with interest. Further, penalty was imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act. Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred appeal before the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) who was pleased to dismiss the appeal vide separate Order-in-appeal. 14. Being aggrieved, the appellant is before this Tribunal. 15. Learned Counsel urges that it is admitted fact that the appellant have received the input services at all the four broadcasting centres. All the four broadcasting centres are registered with the Service Tax Department running taxable output services being 'sale of advertisement slots' etc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been engaged in the manufacture of water treatment plant and other connected items and was availing benefit of Cenvat credit on the duty paid inputs, capital goods and input services as permissible. They were also providing several taxable services such as erection and commissioning, repairing and maintenance of water treatment plant. Revenue authorises, during scrutiny of the records of the assessee, noticed that it was availing the credit of service tax paid for various services by one unit for the purpose of clearance of other unit, which was objected to calling upon the assessee why Cenvat credit on input service amounting to ₹ 1.51 crores should not be recovered. The High Court noticed that the first objection of the Department ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 17. Learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue relied upon the impugned order. 18. Having considered the rival contentions, I find that admittedly the appellant company is one entity which is running radio stations at four places and providing output services being sale of time slot, etc. on which they are paying output service tax. The invoices for input services are not disputed by the Revenue and it is also admitted that appellant had paid to the service provider on the common bills for more than one centre of the appellant, along with the service tax. The Court below has observed in the impugned order, that had the appellant taken registration as an ISD distributor, the credit taken for the other centre, at the Jaipur off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
