HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED Versus CCT, VISAKHAPATNAM GST
Central Excise
2018 (12) TMI 932 – CESTAT HYDERABAD – TMI
CESTAT HYDERABAD – AT
Dated:- 14-12-2018
APPEAL No. E\/30666\/2018 – A\/31562\/2018
Central Excise
Mr. P. VENKATA SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)
\nSmt. Sweta Girdar, Advocate for the Appellant.
\nShri Guna Ranjan, Superintendent \/AR for the Respondent.
\nORDER
\nPer: Mr. P.V. Subba Rao
\n1. This appeal has been filed against Order-in-Appeal No. VIZ-EXCUS- 001-APP-263-17-18, dated 28.02.2018. Heard both sides and perused the records.
\n2. The appellant herein is a Public Sector Undertaking engaged in manufacture of various petroleum products and have been availing the benefit of CENVAT credit. They had taken some land on lease from M\/s Coromandel International Limited who, in turn, have charged them service tax along with lease rentals through four debit notes, dated 23.02.2015. After paying the amount to M\/s Coromandel International Limited, appe<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n le documents for claiming CEVAT credit, the debit notes in question had all the details indicated under Rule 9(2) of CCR 2004, except that the amount of service tax is indicated in pen and was not printed in the debit notes. He produces copies of the debit notes in question. He further submits that in the case of Bharati Hexacom Limited [2018(12) GSTL 123 (Raj.)], the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan held that CENVAT credit can be allowed on the basis of debit notes and upheld the order of the Tribunal in this regard. He further relies on the order of the Tribunal in the case of Dhananjay Industrial Engineer (P) Ltd [2017(52) S.T.R. 320 (Tri.-Mumbai)] wherein it was held that even though it is not pre-printed, commercial invoice is valid document for availing the CENVAT Credit provided all the relevant information is contained in it. He also relied on the order of the Tribunal Delhi in the case of Gabriel India Limited [2017(48) S.T.R. 492 (Tri.-Del.)] in which it was held that CENVAT C<\/p>\n = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n t prescribed under Rule 9(1) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. He further held “moreover, even for the sake of assumption but not admitting that allowing of credit may be examined on the strength of the details contained in the document, as could be seen from the appeal record, the fact is that the appellant instead of furnishing copies of the four Debit Notes for examination, had only furnished a photocopy of the communication dated 02.02.2015 along with a statement of rental details which is quite inadmissible”. Thus holding, the first appellate authority upheld the confirmation of demands along with interest and imposition of penalty. It is true that Rule 9(1) of CCR 2004 does not specifically indicate debit notes as one of the documents on the strength of which CENVAT Credit can be availed. However, the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of Bharati Hexacom Limited (supra) held that CENVAT credit can be availed on the basis of debit notes. This is a binding legal precedent, rat<\/p>\n = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED Versus CCT, VISAKHAPATNAM GSTCentral Excise2018 (12) TMI 932 – CESTAT HYDERABAD – TMICESTAT HYDERABAD – ATDated:- 14-12-2018APPEAL No. E\/30666\/2018 – A\/31562\/2018Central ExciseMr. P. VENKATA SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Smt. Sweta Girdar, Advocate for the Appellant. Shri Guna Ranjan, Superintendent \/AR for the Respondent. ORDER Per: Mr. P.V. Subba Rao 1. This … Continue reading “HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED Versus CCT, VISAKHAPATNAM GST”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-15575","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15575","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=15575"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15575\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=15575"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=15575"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=15575"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n