2013 (3) TMI 383 - AT - Service Tax

Tribunal Orders Appellant to Deposit Service Tax Liability & CENVAT Credit Documentation

Bank of India Versus CST Ahmedabad

The Tribunal directed the appellant to deposit the admitted liability of Service Tax along with interest within twelve weeks. The claim for CENVAT Credit ... Stay - Cenvat Credit - Input services - Duty paying documents - Held that:- The appellant had an opportunity of producing all relevant documents before both the lower authorities and it is very evident from the findings recorded by both the lower authorities that it was not availed. we deem it fit to remit the matter back to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration. In view of this, as a condition of hearing and disposing the matter by adjudicating authority, we direct the appellant to deposit an amount of Rs.5 lakhs (Rupees Five lakhs only) within a period of twelve weeks from today and report compliance on 08.10.2012 to the adjudicating authority.The Stay Petition as also the appeal are disposed off as indicated hereinabove. Issues:1. Waiver of pre-deposit of Service Tax, interest, and penalties under Sections 77 and 78 of Finance Act, 1994.2. Eligibility of CENVAT Credit on input services distributed by the head office.3. Production of relevant documents before lower authorities.4. Compliance with the pre-deposit amounts directed by the Tribunal.Analysis:Issue 1: The appellant filed a Stay Petition seeking waiver of pre-deposit of Service Tax, interest, and penalties under Sections 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 amounting to Rs.16,37,438. The Tribunal found an admitted liability of Service Tax of Rs.1,17,550, directing the appellant to deposit this amount along with interest within twelve weeks and report compliance to the adjudicating authority.Issue 2: The Tribunal noted that the appellant's claim of eligibility for CENVAT Credit on input services distributed by the head office was contested by the lower authorities due to lack of justification and supporting documents. Despite the appellant's assertion of producing voluminous documents, the inability to provide evidence of submitting these documents to the lower authorities led to a decision to remit the matter back for reconsideration by the adjudicating authority.Issue 3: The Tribunal observed that although the appellant claimed to have submitted around 500 pages of documents before the lower authorities, the inability to prove the production of these documents raised doubts. Consequently, the Tribunal emphasized the importance of producing necessary documents to support the claim of eligibility for CENVAT Credit, leading to a decision to remand the matter for further consideration.Issue 4: In order to ensure compliance and proper adjudication, the Tribunal directed the appellant to deposit an additional amount of Rs.5 lakhs within twelve weeks and report compliance to the adjudicating authority. The adjudicating authority was instructed to verify the pre-deposit amounts and the compliance with the directed deposits before reconsidering the issue based on the evidence presented by the appellant.The Stay Petition and the appeal were disposed of with the aforementioned directions, emphasizing the significance of complying with pre-deposit requirements and producing essential documents for proper adjudication of the matter.