TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appellate Tribunal allows Cenvat credit for Service Tax on overseas commission agents</h1> <h3>Indian Acrylic Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise. Chandigarh II</h3> Indian Acrylic Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise. Chandigarh II - 2012 (285) E.L.T. 354 (Tri. - Del.) , 2012 (28) S.T.R. 354 (Tri. - Del.) Issues:1. Utilization of Cenvat credit for Service Tax liability on overseas commission agent.2. Interpretation of Rule 3(4)(e) and Rule 2(r) of Cenvat Credit Rules.3. Impact of deletion of Explanation to Rule 2(b) on Cenvat credit utilization.4. Applicability of Tribunal and High Court decisions on Cenvat credit utilization.Analysis:The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi addressed the issue of utilizing Cenvat credit for Service Tax liability on overseas commission agents. The appellant, a manufacturer of acrylic products, availed Cenvat credit on duty paid inputs and services, including foreign agents' commissions. The dispute centered on whether the appellant could use Cenvat credit for Service Tax on overseas commission agents. The lower authorities denied this based on Rule 3(4)(e), arguing the appellant was not a taxable service provider. The Revenue contended that post-deletion of the Explanation in Rule 2(p), the appellant couldn't claim output service provider status.The Tribunal considered precedents and observed that Cenvat credit could be used for GTA services, akin to commission agents, pre-19.4.06. However, post-19.4.06, the Explanation to Rule 2(b) was deleted, raising questions on Cenvat credit entitlement. The Revenue cited cases like Iswari Spinning Mills and Gimatex Industries to support disallowing credit post-18.4.06. Conversely, the Tribunal referred to National Engg. Inds. Ltd. and Shree Rajasthan Syntex Ltd. decisions, asserting credit utilization pre-1.3.08 was permissible under Rule 2(r).The Tribunal analyzed Rule 2(r) and concluded that the appellant, liable for Service Tax as a service recipient, qualified as a provider of taxable service. Since Rule 2(r) remained unchanged during the relevant period, the Tribunal upheld the appellant's right to use Cenvat credit for overseas commission agent Service Tax. Citing the division bench's reasoning from Shree Rajasthan Syntex Ltd., the Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the impugned orders and granting relief to the appellants.
TaxTMI 