2018 (4) TMI 72 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI – Leasing of license charges – Held that: – we find merit in the appeal so far as it relates to renting of immoveable property and the appeal on the said ground is allowed.
–
Service tax collected from service receivers but not deposited – Held that: – The appellant had clarified that they had deposited the said amount and also once again in the appeal memorandum claimed that they have deposited the said amount. In support of the said assertion the appellant have filed a copy of ST-3 return filed on 26.5.2010 – matter remanded to the original adjudicating authority for ascertaining facts and deciding the issue thereafter.
–
CENVAT credit – duty paying documents – documents which are either zerox copies or not bearing the registration number of the service provider – Held that: – In the appeal memorandum the appellant have given compliance of all these objections – Since the compliance has been made by the appellant the impugned order in so
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
cted from service receivers but not paid the said amount to the Government and (iii) Cenvat Credit of ₹ 57,945/- against respondent on the Cenvat Credit availed on photo copies or documents not produced for verification or where registration of service provider is not appearing on invoice and the submission of the respondent's on the same are discussed at Para 2.1, 2.2 & 2.3 of the instant CESTAT order. 2.1. Ld. AR pointed out that while there are findings on issue (i) there are no finding on issue (ii) and (iii) 3. No one appeared for the appellants. 4. It is seen that the impugned order does not deal with two issues pointed out by Revenue in the ROM. In view of above, the following line of the order: "In view of above, we find merit in the appeal and the same is therefore allowed" may be replaced with the following. 4. In view of above, we find merit in the appeal so far as it relates to renting of immoveable property and the appeal on the said ground is allow
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
opies or not bearing the registration number of the service provider on documents which the appellant have failed to produce before the audit officer. Breakup of the said invoice as follows: Sr. No. Issue of Dispute No. of entries in SCN Amount of credit availed & disputed 1. Availed on the Xerox Copies 19 11,077/- 2. Availed on the Invoices not having S.T. Regn. Number 10 34,348/- 3. Availed on Invoices copies of which are not produced to Audit 6 12,919/- TOTAL 8,344/- In the appeal memorandum the appellant have given compliance of all these objections except for an amount of ₹ 3,769/-which has been reversed by them. Since the compliance has been made by the appellant the impugned order in so far it relates to the demand of reversal of cenvat credit and imposition of penalties thereon is set aside and matter remanded to the adjudicating authority to verify the compliance of various objection raised made by the appellant in the appeal memorandum and to pass fresh orders. 5. T
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =