TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 1143X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A AND ORS. [ 2019 (3) TMI 821 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] it was categorically held that electricity was defined as goods and thus capable of being traded for which it cannot be covered under the category of service tax nor appellant had any licence to supply electricity under the Electricity Act, 2003, but while such an order was passed treating the activity as the appellant therein had converted high tension electricity supply to low tension electricity supply for the purpose of supplying domestically consumable electric power to the occupant against which it had raised the bill, that was being treated as service and accordingly appellant s plea therein was allowed - This case stands completely on a different footing and this can only be tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against proportionate electricity consumption amount was charged under Business Auxiliary Service but electricity being in the nature of sale being exempted from the purview of service tax, credit availed by the respondent in respect of service tax paid towards payment of electricity was denied to the respondent for the period 2013-14 and 2014-15. Show cause-cum-demand notice was raised against the respondent, adjudicated and confirmed against it, who preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). Commissioner (Appeals), vide his detailed order dated 11/10/2008, allowed the appeal by holding that such credit availed even against incorrectly paid service tax was admissible credit in view of the judgment passed in the case of Bajaj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt from a departure from the judicially settled principle that credit cannot be denied at the receiver s end, in view of several decisions of this Tribunal including those reported in Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune vs. Ajinkya Enterprises reported in 2012 (7) TMI 141 BOMBAY HIGH COURT, Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh vs. Ranbaxy Labs Ltd reported in 2006 (7) TMI 216 PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT, Indorama Synthetics (I) Ltd vs. Commissioner of Central Excise Service Tax, Nagpur reported in 2018 (7) TMI 22 CESTAT MUMBAI, Jayaswal Neco Industries Ltd vs. Commissioner of CGST, Palghar reported in 2022 (9) TMI 1283 CESTAT MUMBAI and Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co Ltd vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, reported 2014 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cannot be covered under the category of service tax nor appellant had any licence to supply electricity under the Electricity Act, 2003, but while such an order was passed treating the activity as the appellant therein had converted high tension electricity supply to low tension electricity supply for the purpose of supplying domestically consumable electric power to the occupant against which it had raised the bill, that was being treated as service and accordingly appellant s plea therein was allowed. This case stands completely on a different footing and this can only be treated as an erroneous payment of service tax since no extra amount was collected towards its service component other than the electricity consumption dues. However, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
