Appellate Tribunal Upholds Denial of CENVAT Credit for Exempted Unit Services

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore upheld the lower authorities' decision to deny CENVAT credit to an Input Service Distributor (ISD) for services exclusively used in an exempted unit, as per Rule 7(b) of the CENVAT Credit Rules. The Tribunal also reduced penalties imposed under Rule 15 for wrong credit availment without malafide intent in one appeal but set aside penalties in another appeal involving legal interpretation. Judgments were delivered on 29.10.2015, providing detailed analysis on the distribution of CENVAT credit and imposition of penalties.

---

---

Issues:
1. Distribution of CENVAT credit by an Input Service Distributor (ISD) to units engaged in different activities.
2. Denial of CENVAT credit for services used exclusively in an exempted unit.
3. Imposition of penalties under Rule 15 of CENVAT Credit Rules for wrong availment of credit.

Analysis:
1. The appellant, an ISD engaged in manufacturing construction chemicals in three units, distributed CENVAT credit of service tax to units at different locations. The issue arose when services used at the exempted Rudrapur unit were considered cenvatable and distributed to other units paying duty. Lower authorities initiated proceedings under Rule-7 of CENVAT Credit Rules, resulting in demands for credit denial and penalties. The appellant contended that credit on common services partially used in the exempted unit should be allowed. However, the Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' decision, stating that credit for services used exclusively in an exempted unit cannot be availed by the ISD, as per Rule 7(b).

2. Regarding penalties under Rule 15, the appellant argued that the unamended Rule 15(3) applied to one appeal, imposing a penalty of Rs. 2,000 for wrong credit availment without malafide intent. The Tribunal reduced the penalty to Rs. 2,000 for the relevant case. In the second appeal, the amended Rule 15(3) applied, requiring penalties for malafide intent. As the appellant had reflected the credit in statutory records and the issue involved legal interpretation, the Tribunal set aside the penalty in this case. The judgments were delivered on 29.10.2015 by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore, with detailed analysis and legal interpretations provided for each issue involved in the case.

---