Denial of CENVAT Credit for Lack of Documents on Input Services: CESTAT Remands Matter for Fresh Verification [Read Order]
The tribunal set aside the disallowed credit, interest, penalty, and appropriation, and directed de novo adjudication within 90 days
![Denial of CENVAT Credit for Lack of Documents on Input Services: CESTAT Remands Matter for Fresh Verification [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/06/28/2055618-cestat-cestat-chennai-cenvat-credit-taxscan.webp "Denial of CENVAT Credit for Lack of Documents on Input Services: CESTAT Remands Matter for Fresh Verification [Read Order]")
The Chennai Bench of Customs,Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) remanded a matter involving denial of CENVAT credit due to lack of documents on input services, directing fresh verification by the Adjudicating Authority (AA). GET & D India Pvt. Ltd.,appellant-assessee, had availed Cenvat credit between FY 2010–11 and 2012–13 on services like...
The Chennai Bench of Customs,Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) remanded a matter involving denial of CENVAT credit due to lack of documents on input services, directing fresh verification by the Adjudicating Authority (AA).
GET & D India Pvt. Ltd.,appellant-assessee, had availed Cenvat credit between FY 2010–11 and 2012–13 on services like construction, rent-a-cab, gardening, canteen, guest house, golf club membership, and payment collection services. During audit, the department found that these services did not qualify as 'input services' under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, and noted that supporting documents were not provided.
Complete practical guide to Drafting Commercial Contracts, Click Here
A Show Cause Notice was issued, proposing recovery of the wrongly availed credit along with interest and penalty. The AA, through order dated 30.06.2016, confirmed a demand of ₹1.04 crore, allowed credit of ₹11.24 lakh, and imposed interest and a penalty of ₹52.23 lakh. Part payment of ₹72,591 was appropriated.
The assessee challenged this order before the tribunal.
The assessee counsel argued that the services used were related to manufacturing and eligible for Cenvat credit. He relied on a Madras High Court decision which allowed credit on outdoor catering and rent-a-cab services for the period before April 1, 2011. He stated that most of the disputed credit related to construction services from 2009 and should be allowed.
He admitted that credit was disallowed mainly because the assessee had not submitted invoices earlier, but informed that the documents had now been collected. He requested that the case be remanded for fresh verification.
The departmental representative had no objection to the remand.
Complete Ready to Use PDFs of 200+ Agreements Click here
The two member bench comprising Ajayan T.V (Judicial Member) and Vasa Seshagiri Rao(Technical Member) heard both sides and reviewed the records and case law. Since both parties agreed that the matter needed fresh examination, the tribunal decided to remand the case to the AA.
It held that the assessee should be given a chance to submit the necessary documents to support its claim for Cenvat credit. The CESTAT set aside the disallowed credit, along with the related interest, penalty, and appropriation, without disturbing the credit already allowed.
The case was sent back for de novo adjudication, with directions to follow the principles of natural justice and complete the process within 90 days. The assessee was also directed to cooperate with the proceedings.
Accordingly the appeal was allowed.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
