Equisol Corporation Versus Commissioner of CGST, Mumbai East
Service Tax
2019 (2) TMI 769 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI
CESTAT MUMBAI – AT
Dated:- 29-1-2019
APPEAL No. ST/87289/2018 – A/85223/2019
Service Tax
Dr. D.M. Misra, Member (Judicial)
Shri Sumit Jhunjhunwala, C.A., for appellant
Shri S.B. Mane, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for respondent
ORDER
Heard both sides.
2. This is an appeal filed against order-in-appeal No. CD/TR(APPEALS)/ME/72/2017-18 dated 6.3.2018 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & GST (Appeals), Mumbai.
3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in providing taxable services which are in the nature of supply of tangible goods during the relevant period 2011-12
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
. Aggrieved by the said order, they filed appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) who, in turn, rejected their appeal. Hence the present appeal.
4. Learned Chartered Accountant for the appellant submits that the particulars of disputed invoices against which inadmissible credit alleged to have been mentioned at para 4 of the show cause notice were not the invoices on which credit was availed by them. In support, he has referred to the invoices on which credit was taken, enclosed at pages 94 to 97 of appeal paper book. It is his plea that pursuant to the allegation of non-receipt of the service, they obtained a certificate from the service receiver, namely M/s. Silicon Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata and also placed the payment part
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
not raised before the adjudicating authority nor in their reply to the show cause notice.
6. I have carefully considered the submissions of both sides. I find that the short issue involved in the present appeal is whether the five disputed invoices on which the appellant had availed credit, are genuine or otherwise. Prima facie I find that the invoices which are mentioned in the show cause notice are not relevant to the proceeding. The invoices which are now produced by the learned AR for the Revenue, being the same also enclosed by the learned CA for the appellant, but different from the ones in the show cause notice, therefore, in my opinion, it is prudent to remand the matter to the adjudicating authority to ascertain the fact. Needless
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =