TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 778X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich is exempt from the whole of the service tax leviable thereon, is an exempted service. It is not the case of any side that the service which has been provided under the state of Jammu Kashmir has been exempted as whole. Therefore, the said provision is not applicable to the facts of this case. On consideration of the decision in the case of Adecco Flexione Workforce Solutions Ltd [ 2015 (11) TMI 1047 - CESTAT BANGALORE ] the period of dispute is year 2008-09, whereas the definition of exempted service under Rule 2(e) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 has been introduced on 20.06.2012; therefore, the said decision is not applicable to the facts of this case. Further, in the case of Ramboll Imisoft Pvt Ltd [ 2016 (6) TMI 1071 - CEST ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and also produced the C.A. certificate along with details of all the invoices - the appellant has already reversed the cenvat credit of ₹ 87,036/-. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Excise Appeal No. 61004 of 2019 - FINAL ORDER NO. 60558/2021 - Dated:- 18-3-2021 - MR. ASHOK JINDAL, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Present for the Appellant: Mr. Ajay Jain, Advocate Present for the Respondent: Mr. Bhasha Ram, Authorized Representative ORDER The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein demand under Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 has been raised on the following grounds:- (a) A demand of ₹ 4,59,963/- for the services provided to the service recip ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2.3 He further submits that as per the invoice, it is clear that the inputs clear as such, the appellant has reversed the cenvat credit. Further to that extent, the appellant has produced the C.A. certificate certifying that they have reversed the cenvat credit on inputs clear as such. 3. On the other hand, ld. A.R. opposes the contention of the ld. Counsel and relies on the decision in the case of Adecco Flexione Workforce Solutions Ltd vs. CCE ST, Bangalore 2016 (42) STR 202 (Tri. Bang.). The ld. A.R. submits that the services provided to the state of Jammu Kashmir are exempt from payment of service tax, therefore, the appellant is required to reverse the cenvat credit availed for providing the service in the state of Jammu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he value of all services, other than those services specified in the negative list, provided or agreed to be provided in the taxable territory by one person to another and collected in such manner as may be prescribed. On going through the said provision, the said provision is also not applicable to the facts of the case. 5.3 Further, Rule 2(e)(3) is also not applicable to the facts of the case. 5.4 In the light of these, I have to examine the decisions cited by both the sides. On consideration of the decision in the case of Adecco Flexione Workforce Solutions Ltd (supra), I find that period of dispute is year 2008-09, whereas the definition of exempted service under Rule 2(e) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 has been introduce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Bom.). Hence, the said amount of ₹ 93,206/- is set aside. 6.3 Further, denial of the cenvat credit of ₹ 87,036/- on the ground that there is no evidence on record that inputs cleared as such, the appellant has reversed the cenvat credit. To that effect, invoice itself speaks that the cenvat credit has reversed in terms of Rule 3(4) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and also produced the C.A. certificate along with details of all the invoices. In these circumstances, I hold that the appellant has already reversed the cenvat credit of ₹ 87,036/-. 7. In these terms, I do not find any merit in the impugned order. The same is set aside. 8. In result, the appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any. (Dictate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
