Tribunal grants relief for wrongful Cenvat Credit, aligning with precedent

The appeal was allowed by the Tribunal based on the precedent set by its earlier decision. The appellant was granted relief regarding the wrongful availing of Cenvat Credit on service tax invoices, as the Tribunal found the appellant entitled to Cenvat credit on storage or warehousing charges paid on inputs. The Tribunal's decision aligned with its previous ruling in a similar case, where it was established that such charges were part of the input cost, making the appellant eligible for the credit.

---

---

Issues:
1. Wrong availing of Cenvat Credit on service tax invoices.
2. Interpretation of Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.
3. Precedent set by Tribunal in a similar case.
4. Entitlement to Cenvat credit on storage or warehousing charges.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed against the Order dated 9.12.2021 by the Commissioner (Appeals), CE & CGST, which rejected the appellant's appeal regarding the wrongful availing of Cenvat Credit of Service Tax on invoices issued by principal importers. The Revenue claimed that the appellant wrongly availed the credit as the services were incurred before the agreement date with the appellant, and the appellant did not directly avail the services or pay the service provider. The Revenue demanded the wrongly availed Cenvat credit amounting to Rs.59,640/- for the period from January 2016 to June 2017.

2. The issue revolved around the interpretation of Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Revenue argued that the appellant did not qualify for input service credit as per the rule since the services were not directly availed by the appellant from the actual service provider. The Tribunal's decision in a similar case for the appellant's earlier years was cited, where it was held that the appellant was entitled to Cenvat credit on storage or warehousing charges paid on inputs. The Tribunal reasoned that the warehouse or storage charges paid were part of the input cost, making the appellant eligible for the credit.

3. The Tribunal referred to its earlier decision in the matter of M/s. Rovex Polymers Pvt. Ld. Vs. Commr. (Appeals), DGGSTI, Jaipur, where it was established that the appellant was entitled to avail Cenvat credit on storage or warehousing charges incurred in the acquisition of inputs. The Tribunal's decision in the previous case was not challenged, leading to the current appeal being allowed based on the precedent set by the Tribunal. The appellant was granted consequential relief in accordance with the law.

4. The Tribunal, without delving into further details of the case, allowed the appeal filed by the appellant, citing the precedent set by its earlier decision. The appellant was granted relief, if any, as per the law. The order was pronounced in the open court on 13.09.2022.

---