Appeal Dismissed Upholding Cenvat Credit on TR6 Challan for Service Tax

The appeal against the Order-In-Appeal setting aside the Order-In-Original regarding availing Cenvat credit on Service Tax paid by TR6 challan was dismissed. The presiding judge found no grounds for interference in the impugned order, holding it legal and correct. The judgment emphasized the validity of availing Cenvat credit on TR6 challan for Service Tax liability discharge based on prior rules and relevant Tribunal decisions. The principle of binding Tribunal decisions on lower authorities like the Commissioner (Appeals) was underscored, leading to the rejection of the Revenue's appeal.

---

---

Issues:
Appeal against Order-In-Appeal setting aside Order-In-Original regarding availing Cenvat credit on Service Tax paid by TR6 challan.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the Order-In-Appeal No. 109/ANS/GGN/2009, dated 23.04.2009. Despite the respondent being informed about the hearing date, no one appeared on their behalf. The Revenue contended that the appeal was against the impugned order setting aside the Order-In-Original, which confirmed the demand raised for availing credit on Service Tax paid by TR6 challan. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) had set aside the Order-In-Original, allowing Cenvat credit on TR6 challan, citing rules applicable prior to 16/03/2006. The Tribunal decisions in cases like CCE vs. Essel Propack Ltd. and CCE Goa vs. Crompton Greaves were referenced, emphasizing that Cenvat credit can be availed on TR6 challan indicating the discharge of Service Tax liability. The Tribunal's decisions were deemed binding on the Commissioner (Appeals), and no deviation from the established ratio was warranted.

The presiding judge, M.V.Ravindran, found no grounds for interference in the impugned order. It was held to be legal and correct, leading to the rejection of the Revenue's appeal. The judgment highlighted the significance of prior rules allowing Cenvat credit on TR6 challan for Service Tax liability discharge, as supported by relevant Tribunal decisions. The principle of binding Tribunal decisions on lower authorities like the Commissioner (Appeals) was reiterated, emphasizing the consistency in applying established legal interpretations. The judgment concluded with the rejection of the Revenue's appeal, affirming the validity of the impugned order.

---