M/s. Mangalore Ganesh Beedi Works Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise
Service Tax
2018 (6) TMI 675 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 14-6-2018
Appeal No. ST/40939/2018 – Final Order No. 41801 / 2018
Service Tax
Hon'ble Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member ( Judicial )
Sh. S.K.Venugopala Rao, Chartered Accountant for the Appellant
Shri B. Balamurugan, AC (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Brief facts are that the appellants were issued show cause notice alleging that the credit availed on two input service distributor (ISD) invoices dated 14.2.2011 for Rs. 60,550/- and another dated 5.10.2011 for Rs. 52,390/- is not eligible for credit as these invoices did not contain the mandatory details. After due p
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ubmitted that the appellant had availed the services of real estate agent for purchase of land from real estate agent and credit was availed to the tune of Rs. 60,550/- in this regard. Further, service was received for settling up dispute for which an amount of Rs. 51,500/- was availed as credit. For the mere reason that the invoices did not contain the necessary particulars of the service provider, the department has sought to deny the credit. He submitted that the appellant had furnished the input service distributor invoices as well as the details of the credit availed which has not been considered by the authorities below. He adverted to proviso to Rule 9(2) and argued that in case of invoices not containing necessary particulars, the A
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
the services are for GTA purpose which does not match with the contention raised by the appellant. On this ground, the authorities below have rightly denied the credit as well as imposed penalty.
4. Heard both sides.
5. At the outset, it has to be stated that the appellant though has argued in detail with regard to the eligibility of credit, has then submitted that they are confining their contest to the penalty imposed. On perusal of the show cause notice, it is seen that the only allegation raised is that the invoices issued by the service provider did not contain necessary details. It is also seen from the records that the Range Officer, Palayamkottai was called for to scrutinize and report about the said two invoices. Nothing is brou
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =