SC: Ex-Contract Workers Must Be Preferred When Employers Replace Contract Labour With Regular Staff  ||  SC: Waqf Tribunals Cannot Hear Claims over Properties Not Listed or Registered under Waqf Act  ||  Supreme Court: Stray Dog Attacks on Beaches Adversely Impact Tourism  ||  Chhattisgarh HC: Court Employees Cannot Enroll as Regular LLB Students in Breach of Service Rules  ||  Kerala HC: Telling Someone to "Go Away And Die" in Anger Does Not Amount to Abetment of Suicide  ||  Kerala HC: High Courts Work On Holidays; Denying Compensatory Leave To Officers Violates Art. 229  ||  Del HC: Probationers are ‘Workmen’ under ID Act; S.17B Wages not Recoverable if Termination Upheld  ||  Supreme Court: Confession Without Corroboration Cannot Form the Basis of Conviction  ||  SC: Higher Land Acquisition Compensation to Some Owners Cannot Invalidate Awards to Others  ||  SC: Prior Written Demand is Not Mandatory For an Industrial Dispute to Exist or be Referred    

Mammon Concast Pvt. Ltd. vs. Alwar - (Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal) (17 Jun 2021)

An importer is entitled to avail cenvat credit on inputs, if the importer is registered in terms of the provisions of Central Excise Rules

MANU/CE/0064/2021

Customs

The issue in present appeal is whether the Appellant have rightly taken credit of service tax on port charges etc. in the facts that they had purchased the goods from high sea seller and some of the invoices for port services etc. were in the name of high sea seller, but in fact have been paid by the appellant who have filed Bill of Entry for home consumption, and such Bill of Entry also mentioned the name of the original importer (who sold on high sea sale basis). The appellant is a manufacturer of M. S. Billets. The Appellant was also availing the cenvat credit facility of input and input services, for the manufacture of their final product.

Admittedly, the melting scrap purchased by the Appellant on high sea sale, is their input for manufacture of M.S. billets. Rule 9(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 provides that, cenvat credit shall be taken by the manufacturer on the basis of invoice issued by a manufacturer for clearance of inputs from his factory or depot or from the premises of the consignment agent of the said manufacturer or from any other premises from where the goods are sold by or on behalf of the said manufacturer. Similarly, an importer is entitled to avail cenvat credit on inputs, if the importer is registered in terms of the provisions of Central Excise Rules, 2002 (admittedly Appellant is registered with the Central Excise Department as well as the Service Tax Department). Further, Rule 9(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules provides that, no cenvat credit under sub-rule (1) shall be taken unless all the particulars as prescribed under the Central Excise Rules, 2002 or the Service Tax Rules, 1994, as the case may be, are contained in the said documents.

Further, Rule 4A(1) of Service Tax Rules provides that, every provider of taxable service on completion of such service or receipt of payment towards the same, shall issue an invoice or bill or as the case may be, a challan in respect of such taxable service provided or agreed to be provided and such document shall be serially numbered.

There is no dispute as to the aforementioned requirement save and except the invoice not being in the name of the Appellant (but in the name of the original importer - high sea seller). No specific documents have been mentioned considering the transaction of subsequent sale on high sea sale basis, in the Rules. Thus, the scheme of the Act read with the Rules has to be read harmoniously. If for something missing in the rules, the cenvat credit is available under the scheme of the Act, read with Rule 3 read with Rule 2(l) and (k) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, service credit cannot be denied for some gap left in the statute. Such interpretation will defeat the scheme of cenvat credit, leading to anomalous situation. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances, Appellant has rightly taken cenvat credit under dispute. The impugned order stands modified. The penalty imposed is also set aside. Appeal allowed.

Tags : CENVAT CREDIT   PENALTY   LEGALITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved