The Kolkata Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) confirmed the appellant’s eligibility for CENVAT Credit stating that complete details were available in bills/invoices as mandated under rule 9(2) of the CENVAT credit rules ( CCR ), 2004.
Saraf Services Pvt Ltd (appellant) is engaged in a business that includes maintenance and repair services, business auxiliary services, and renting immovable property services. The appellant did not pay service tax which was found in the balance sheet and profit and loss account during the audit.
Small Business, Big Funding Opportunities – Click here to Register
The appellant was issued a notice demanding recovery of CENVAT credit of Rs. 69,73,243 from April 2007 to March 2012. The notice stated that the appellant availed irregular credit under Rule 14 of the CCR, 2004.
The commissioner disallowed the CENVAT credit on the grounds that the bills did not meet the requirements provided under rule 4(7) of the CENVAT credit Rules, 2004. Therefore, the commissioner mandated the recovery of CENVAT Credit from the appellant. Aggrieved by the order of the commissioner, an appeal was filed before CESTAT.
The counsel for the appellant argued that the bills contain all necessary details required in terms of Rule 9(2) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The counsel also submitted that there was no contravention of Rule 4(7) of the CCR, 2004. Therefore, the counsel submitted that the appellant was eligible for CENVAT credit.
Small Business, Big Funding Opportunities – Click here to Register
On the other hand, the counsel for revenue relied on the findings of the commissioner and sought to dismiss the appeal.
The two-member bench comprising R. Muralidhar (Judicial Member) and K. Anpazhakan (Technical Member) observed that the CENVAT credit was denied on the ground that input bills/invoices did not meet the requirements as mandated by Rule 4(7) of the CCR, 2004.
The tribunal verified the bills/ invoices and held that they contained details in terms of Rule 9(2) of CCR, 2004. Therefore, the tribunal held that there was no contravention of Rule 4(7) of CCR, 2004. The tribunal held that the appellant has rightly availed the CENVAT Credit. The appeal of the appellant was allowed.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
