Marvelous Metals Pvt Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central GST Kolhapur
Service Tax
2018 (4) TMI 1462 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI
CESTAT MUMBAI – AT
Dated:- 14-3-2018
ST/88011 & 88012/2017 – A/ 85673-85674/2018
Service Tax
Shri M V Ravindran, Member (Judicial)
Shri V.B. Gaikwad, Advocate for the appellant
Shri Atul Sharma, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the respondent
ORDER
These appeals are directed against Order-in-Appeal No: PUNEXCUS-001-APP-353 & 354/2017-18 dated 14/09/2017 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune – I.
2. Heard both the sides and perused the records.
3. Relevant facts that arise for consideration are during the period October 2012 to March 2015, the appellant herein were required
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ce stands discharged by them by way of adjustment by Revenue authorities against rebate which were sanctioned. It is his submission that in the appeal they are contesting only the imposition of penalties by the lower authorities and upheld by the first appellate authority. He would submit that the service tax liability to be discharged under the reverse charge mechanism by them is available to the appellant as CENVAT credit as the same are used in activities of manufacture of final products. He would submit that the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise v. Telco Tenneco RC India Pvt. Ltd. [2015 (323) ELT 299 (Mad.)] has held that when revenue neutrality situation arises, the allegation of willful suppres
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
position that the non-payment of service tax cannot be condoned. It is his submission that once there is a demand that is confirmed and the appellant is required to discharge the service tax liability and has not done so due to suppression of facts from the department the tax liability arises along with consequential penalty.
6. On careful consideration of the submissions made, since the appellant is only contesting the imposition of equivalent amount of penalties in this case, this order disposes off the appeals only on that point. I find that the appellant has been taking consistent stand before the lower authorities that even if the service tax liability needs to be discharged they are eligible to avail the same as CENVAT credit as the
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =