Appeal partly allowed, Revenue's rectification accepted. Service tax on leasing modified, Cenvat Credit denial overturned.

The appeal was partly allowed, with the Revenue's rectification of mistake (ROM) regarding service tax on leasing of license charges being accepted, leading to modifications in the original order. However, the non-payment of service tax collected from service receivers was set aside for further investigation due to discrepancies in the appellant's claims. Additionally, the denial of Cenvat Credit was overturned as the appellant addressed most objections, resulting in the reversal of the demand for credit and penalties. The matter was remanded for the adjudicating authority to verify compliance and make a fresh decision.

---

---

Issues involved:
1. Service tax on leasing of license charges
2. Non-payment of service tax collected from service receivers
3. Denial of Cenvat Credit

Analysis:

1. Service tax on leasing of license charges:
The Revenue filed a rectification of mistake (ROM) regarding an order related to service tax issues. The issues for determination included service tax amounts for specific periods. The ROM highlighted discrepancies in the original order, particularly the lack of findings on certain issues raised by the Revenue. The Tribunal acknowledged the oversight and modified the order to address the specific issues. The appeal was allowed concerning the renting of immovable property.

2. Non-payment of service tax collected from service receivers:
Another issue concerned the non-payment of a specific service tax amount collected by the appellant from service receivers. The appellant claimed to have deposited the amount, supported by a copy of the ST-3 return. The Tribunal found discrepancies in the confirmation of the demand and the appellant's assertion. Consequently, the demand and penalties related to this issue were set aside, and the matter was remanded for further investigation by the original adjudicating authority.

3. Denial of Cenvat Credit:
The denial of Cenvat Credit amounting to a specific sum was based on claims made on certain documents. The appellant had failed to produce documents before the audit officer, leading to the denial of credit. The Tribunal reviewed the objections raised and the compliance provided by the appellant. As the appellant had addressed most objections, the impugned order regarding the demand of credit reversal and penalties was set aside. The matter was remanded for the adjudicating authority to verify the compliance and make a fresh decision.

In conclusion, the appeal was partly allowed based on the specific terms outlined for each issue. The ROM application was also allowed, and the judgment was pronounced in court on a specified date.

---