M/s. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai – I
Central Excise
2018 (9) TMI 1118 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 10-7-2018
Appeal No. E/42186/2017 – Final Order No. 41969/2018
Central Excise
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial)
Ms. Vishnu Priya, Advocate for the Appellant
Shri B. Balamurugan, AC (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Brief facts are that the appellants who are engaged in manufacture of excisable goods were availing the facility of CENVAT credit of service tax paid on various input services. On verification of records, it was noticed that they had availed wrongful credit on rent-a-cab services for the period April 2011 to May 20
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
rts as well as the Tribunal, the said credit is eligible. She relied upon the Master Circular of the Board No.943/04/2011-CX dated 29.4.2011 and argued that the Board has clarified that if the provision of services is prior to 1.4.2011, then the credit which is availed after the said date is eligible. She adverted to the various invoices and pointed out that though the payments were received after 1.4.2011, the services were consumed by the appellant prior to 1.4.2011.
3. The ld. AR Shri B. Balamurugan supported the findings in the impugned order. He submitted that it is not clear from the records whether the services were consumed prior to 1.4.2011 and therefore the matter requires to be remanded for verification on this aspect.
4. Heard
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
1.4.2011, even though the payments are received after the said date, credit is eligible. The ld. counsel has also furnished copies of the invoices. On going through the same, I find that for the period for which the services have been consumed is shown as prior to 1.4.2011. However, this fact has to be verified for which, I deem it fit to remand the matter to the adjudicating authority, who shall consider the issue whether the services have been availed by the appellant prior to 1.4.2011 and also consider the applicability of the decision relied by the ld. counsel for appellant. Needless to say that the Board's circular is binding on the department.
6. In the result, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed by way of rema
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =