Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal Grants CENVAT Credit for Full Service Tax Payment, Emphasizes Statutory Compliance</h1> The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the appellant, holding that despite reduced payments for services, full service tax payment as per ... CENVAT credit - input services - service tax not paid in accordance with what is indicated in the Invoice - it was alleged that appellant has not paid the value of input services and the service tax paid as indicated in the invoice/bills has paid a reduced amount as was evident from the records - Rule 4(7) of CCR 2004 - HELD THAT:- It is not in dispute that the appellant has paid less amount towards the services availed by them by reducing the consideration of the services. They did not pay the tax on full invoice value. However, service provider paid service tax on the full invoice value and the appellant has taken credit of the entire amount of service tax paid. There is an excess payment of service tax by the service provider considering the reduced payment made for the services. This excess payment could have been claimed as refund by the service provider but they have already passed on this burden to the appellants herein. The appellants herein have borne the full burden of the excess service tax paid by them. They have also taken credit of the excess service tax. An alternative could have been for the appellant to seek refund of the excess amount of service tax paid as the persons who bore the burden of excess service tax. From a plain reading of Rule 4(7), it does not appear that Rule 4(7) provides for a proportionate reduction of CENVAT Credit where the value of services rendered is reduced subsequently but service tax was discharged on the original amount and borne by the service recipient - This is consistent with the circular of the Board No. 877/15/2008-CX, dated 17.11.2008 in which the Board has clarified that where higher duty than the due is paid due to subsequent reduction in prices, credit as per invoice is available to the assessee. This is also consisted with similar circular regarding credit of service tax in Board’s Circular No. 122/3/2010-ST, dt.30.04.2010. Both these circulars were, of course, issued prior to Rule 4(7) was amended w.e.f. 01.04.2011. The appellant is entitled to CENVAT Credit of the service tax paid by them as indicated in the invoices - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. Issues:Appeal against Order-in-Appeal regarding eligibility of CENVAT Credit on input services.Analysis:1. The appellant, a petroleum products manufacturer, availed CENVAT Credit on inputs and input services. During audit, discrepancies were found where the appellant had not paid the full value of input services to service providers, resulting in a show cause notice for ineligible CENVAT Credit.2. The appellant argued that despite reducing service charges, they paid the full service tax as per invoices, entitling them to CENVAT Credit. They relied on Rule 4(7) of CCR 2004 and various case laws to support their claim.3. The Revenue contended that the appellant's reduced payments for services rendered made them ineligible for CENVAT Credit as per Rule 4(7) provisions. They emphasized strict adherence to statutory provisions over circulars and case laws.4. The Tribunal noted that while the appellant paid less for services, they paid the full service tax amount indicated in the invoices. Considering that the excess service tax burden was passed on to the appellant, they were entitled to CENVAT Credit as per the invoices.5. The Tribunal held that Rule 4(7) did not mandate a proportionate reduction in CENVAT Credit when the service tax was paid in full, despite reduced service payments. Circulars and past decisions supported this interpretation, ensuring no loss to revenue.6. Following consistent decisions by Coordinate Benches, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order and granting consequential relief to the appellant.In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, affirming their entitlement to CENVAT Credit based on full payment of service tax as per invoices, despite reduced payments for services rendered.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found