TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... find that various Benches of the CESTAT have taken a consistent view that in respect of computer generated invoices, signature was not required and consequently, have directed the authorities not to deny the input Service Tax credit in M/S MAMMON CONCAST PVT. LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, CUSTOMS CENTRAL EXCISE - ALWAR (RAJASTHAN) [ 2021 (6) TMI 619 - CESTAT NEW DELHI ] - the input Service Tax credit should not be denied merely because the invoices are computer generated, which did not have signatures. Consequently, to this extent, the impugned order is set aside and this ground of the appeal stands allowed. Denial of input Service Tax credit on the allegations of non-fulfilment of the conditions i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal stands dismissed. Penalty levied under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 - HELD THAT:- The appellant had entertained a bona fide doubt as to the Service Tax liability and there is also no finding that the appellant had intentionally evaded the payment of Service Tax. Moreover, from the facts which have been brought on record, there is no scope for any fraud or intent to evade the payment of Service Tax. Hence, it is deemed proper to delete the penalty levied under Section 78 ibid. by invoking the provisions of Section 80 ibid. and accordingly, the impugned order to this extent is set aside and this ground of the appeal stands allowed. Appeal disposed off. - Service Tax Appeal No. 491 of 2011 - FINAL ORDER NO. 40087/2023 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, 1994, thereby proposing to demand the same by invoking the larger period of limitation, apart from applicable interest and penalty. From the records, it appears that the appellant filed its reply and participated in the adjudication proceedings as well. 5. The Adjudicating Authority, after hearing the appellant and after considering its explanation, has vide impugned order confirmed a partial demand thereby allowing a partial CENVAT Credit also, but however, has proceeded to confirm the demand in respect of most of the other part. It is against this order that the present appeal has been filed before this forum. 6.1 It is the case of the appellant that it had claimed input Service Tax credit to the extent of Rs.34,31,074/-, but how ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ure was not required and consequently, have directed the authorities not to deny the input Service Tax credit, in the following cases:- (i) M/s. Mammon Concast Pvt. Ltd. v. Commr. of CGST, Cus. C.Ex., Alwar [2021 (52) G.S.T.L. 613 (Tri. Del.)]; (ii) M/s. Poornam Info Vision v. Commissioner of C.T. C.Ex., Cochin [2019 (365) E.L.T 592 (Tri. Bang.)] 9.2 Following the ratio of the above orders, we are of the view that the input Service Tax credit should not be denied merely because the invoices are computer generated, which did not have signatures. Consequently, to this extent, the impugned order is set aside and this ground of the appeal stands allowed. 9.3.1 The next grievance of the appellant is the denial of input Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on record all supporting documents in support of their claims. Further, as noted by us in the above paragraphs, the CESTAT Benches have consistently taken the view that such input Service Tax credit shall not be denied just because the supporting invoices were computer generated and the same proposition would equally apply in respect of photocopy of invoices. Hence, we are of the view that the input Service Tax credit cannot be denied just because computer generated invoices or photocopies of invoices were produced and consequently, we direct the authority to allow the appellant s claim of input Service Tax credit wherever computer generated invoices and photocopies of the same were produced in support. 9.3.4 Insofar as the finding as to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... credit for the reason that some of the invoices were photocopies and computer generated and without signature, the same is decided in favour of the assessee and to this extent, the impugned order is set aside and this ground of the appeal stands allowed. In respect of denial of credit on the ground of non-fulfilment of conditions of Rule 4A ibid., however, we do not interfere with the impugned order insofar as the finding as to mismatch of name, date, etc., is concerned, while only allowing the credit in cases where computer generated invoices or photocopies of the same were produced, thereby partly allowing this ground of the appeal. (2) Issue No. 2: In respect of the demand of Service Tax on the link advance received, we do not inte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
