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>Waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery granted in Cenvat credit case appeal</h1> <h3>SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES LTD. Versus COMMR. OF C. EX. (ST), PONDICHERY</h3> The Tribunal granted a waiver of predeposit and a stay of recovery of dues until the final disposal of the appeal in the case involving the utilization of ... GTA service availed for receipt of inputs in to the factory – whether impugned service is not a deemed output service, as contended by department – whether liability for GTA service is dischargeable using Cenvat Credit account, as contended by assessee, recipient of service – impugned issue is very contentious but in view of tribunal’s various decisions in favour of assessee, stay is granted Issues:Utilization of Cenvat credit for GTA service liability.Analysis:The case involved the utilization of Cenvat credit by M/s. Southern Agrifurane Industries Ltd. for discharging liability towards GTA service received for bringing in raw materials to their factory. The department objected to this utilization and demanded the credit under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994, along with interest and penalties under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 and Rule 15(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (CCR).The appellant argued that as per the relevant provisions of CCR and Service Tax Rules 1994, the GTA service received should be considered as output service, allowing the utilization of Cenvat credit for payment. They cited case laws to support their claim, where the Tribunal had held that GTA service availed for receipt of inputs into the factory constituted output service.On the other hand, the respondent contended that the appellant, being a manufacturer of final products, the GTA service availed for receiving inputs cannot be deemed as output service as per the explanation under Rule 2(p) of CCR. The respondent argued that the impugned order was passed in accordance with the law.After considering the arguments from both sides, the Tribunal found the issue to be contentious and needing further deliberation. However, considering the decisions of the Tribunal in favor of the appellant in similar cases, the Tribunal ordered a complete waiver of predeposit and a stay of recovery of dues until the final disposal of the appeal.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
