9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 553X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (hereinafter called as the "impugned order") passed by the Superintendent, Central Goods & Services Tax Range L-II, Kishangarh, Distt-Ajmer (hereinafter called as the "adjudicating authority"). 2. Brief facts of the case : 2.1 The appellant having GSTIN No. 08AAACR9701L1Z4 is engaged in supply of taxable service under the category of Goods Transport Agency Service, appeared to have wrongly availed the input tax credit of Rs. 2,32,334/- of Cenvat credit taken in GST TRAN-1 as ITC with regard to Input Service of GTA under RCM paid on 6-7-2017 under head 7(b) of TRAN-1 which was not shown in ST-3 return ending on June, 2017 in contravention of Section 140(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 117 of the CGST Rules, 2017. 2.2&ems ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 50(3) of CGST/SGST Act, 2017 and also liable for penal action under Section 122(2) of the CGST Act, 2017. 4. The adjudicating authority, after considering the submission of the assessee, has passed the order as under :- (i) Disallowed the input tax credit amounting to Rs. 2,32,334/- (Rupees Two Lac Thirty Two Thousand Three Hundred Thirty Four only) and ordered it to be recovered in terms of provisions of Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and Section 73(1) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Cenvat credit has already been reversed by the assessee, the same is appropriated in the Govt. account. (ii) Ordered for recovery of interest on the said input tax credit under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ailment of Cenvat credit. * that in both the disputes there is no debate or doubt about the availment of input services and payment of input service tax. There is no dispute about the category of input services and utilization of input services for the business purpose. * that in the light of the above facts and ingredients of the case it is argued that what is violated is procedural condition of the law and violation was unintentionally due to provisions being new, lack of knowledge and such lapses are ought to occur during the initial phase of new law. * that so far as provisions for invoking penalty is concerned it is submitted that the case is relating to procedural violation of law and hence no penalty is leviable. * that in re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 140(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 and Section 140(5) of the CGST Act, 2017 are as under : (1) A registered person, other than a person opting to pay tax under section 10, shall be entitled to take, in his electronic credit ledger, the amount of CENVAT Credit of eligible duties carried forward in the return relating to the period ending with the day immediately preceding the appointed day, furnished by him under the existing law in such manner as may be prescribed : Provided that the registered person shall not be allowed to take credit in the following circumstances, namely :- (i) where the said amount of credit is not admissible as input tax credit under this Act; or (ii) where ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut the credit has been taken on 30-6-2017 which is not in accordance with the existing law i.e. Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Since, the appellant was not entitled to avail the credit in the month of June, 2017 they were not having any Cenvat credit balance legally in their return before the appointed day, therefore, were not entitled to transfer the said credit in Table 5(a) of TRAN-1 as ITC and was not in accordance with the transitional provision of Section 141(1) of CGST Act, 2017 and rightly disallowed by the adjudicating authority. Further, I find that the appellant has taken the Cenvat credit of Rs. 61,518/- as ITC in Table 7(b) of GST TRAN-1 related to appellant itself. In the cases where the credit taken on or before 30-6-2017 should ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
