2018 (10) TMI 705 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI – 100% EOU – CENVAT Credit – duty paying invoices – credit availed on the basis of photocopy of invoices – Held that:- Since the appellants have already furnished the original invoices at the time of filing the refund claim, it cannot be expected of the appellants to produce the same in these proceedings before the authorities – credit cannot be denied.
–
Penalties – CENVAT credit – denial on account that appellants have not produced invoices – credit along with interest paid before issuance of SCN – Held that:- The records are not so clear as to the fact of reversal of credit by the appellants – this issue requires to be relooked by the adjudicating authority – Matter on remand.
–
Appeal allowed in part and part matter on remand. – ST/40213-40214/2018 and ST/40216 to ST/40225/2018 – 42551-42562/2018 – Dated:- 5-10-2018 – Smt. Sulekha Beevi C.S, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Shri S. Ramachandran, Cons. For the Respondent : Shri R.
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
o., date Amount dropped Amount confirmed Amount of penalty imposed under Rule 15 (1) of CCR, 2004 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) 01 2,80,237 01 to 03/2017, dated 31.01.2017 2,77,729 2,508 5,000 02 10,78,644 04 to 08/2017, dated 31.01.2017 9,16,414 1,62,230 16,223 03 42,47,421 04 to 07/2017, dated 28.02.2017 41,15,167 1,12,254 10,000 55,86,302 53,09,310 2,76,992 1.3 Appeals filed before Commissioner (Appeals) were rejected vide Order-in-Appeal Nos. 181-183/2017, dated 27.09.2017. Hence, the present appeals. 2.1 On behalf of the appellants, learned consultant Shri S. Ramachandran appeared and argued the matter. He submitted that credit has been disallowed to the tune of ₹ 1,28,473/- alleging that the appellants have not produced the documents. Out of this amount, he submitted that the demand to the tune of ₹ 2,766/- is not pressed by the appellants. For the balance amount of ₹ 1,25,707/-, he submitted that the invoices were produced by the appellants at the time of filing the
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
on downloaded copies of invoices were not signed by overseas job worker. He submitted that these amounts pertain to charges paid for import of services and the appellants have paid service tax on reverse charge mechanism based on challans. Rule 9(1)(e) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 states that the challans are documents admissible for availing credit. 2.3 With regard to the amount of ₹ 1,12,254/-, it is submitted by the learned consultant that demand has been raised stating that appellants have not produced invoices. Learned consultant submitted that the appellants have already reversed this amount and the demand raised along with interest and penalties in this regard cannot sustain. 3. The learned Authorised Representative Shri R. Subramaniyan supported the findings in the impugned order. 4. Heard both sides. 5. After perusal of records, it was found that the appellants have availed credit to the tune of ₹ 1,25,707/- on photocopies of invoices. 6. The authority below has d
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
The appellants admit that they are not eligible for this credit, but contend that they have already reversed it before issuance of show-cause notice and, therefore, are not liable to pay interest or penalties. In this regard, after hearing the submissions, I find that the records are not so clear as to the fact of reversal of credit by the appellants. Therefore, I am of the view that this issue requires to be relooked by the adjudicating authority. In case the appellants have reversed the credit, the penalty on this score cannot sustain as per the decision in the case of M/s. Strategic Engineering P. Ltd., (supra). This issue is, therefore, remanded. 9. From the discussions made above, the impugned order is modified by allowing the credit of ₹ 1,25,707/- + ₹ 36,296/- and remanding the issue with regard to ₹ 1,12,254/-. The appeals are partly allowed and partly remanded. (Dictated and pronounced in open court) – Case laws – Decisions – Judgements – Orders – Tax Mana
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =