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>Tribunal grants Cenvat Credit on sales incentives, remands denial on input services</h1> <h3>Veljan Denison Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Tax Medchal – GST</h3> Veljan Denison Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Tax Medchal – GST - TMI Issues Involved:1. Eligibility of Cenvat Credit on sales incentives paid.2. Denial of Cenvat Credit on various input services due to lack of nexus with output.3. Denial of Cenvat Credit for not adducing evidence.4. Denial of Cenvat Credit on renting of office building used by other group companies.5. Denial of Cenvat Credit for billing in the name of units/service provided to other units.6. Denial of Cenvat Credit taken twice.7. Denial of Cenvat Credit due to Service Tax Registration No. not mentioned in the invoice.8. Denial of Cenvat Credit on bills in the name of other companies.9. Denial of Cenvat Credit without specified documents.10. Denial of Cenvat Credit without documents.11. Invocation of extended period of limitation.Summary:1. Eligibility of Cenvat Credit on Sales Incentives Paid:The Appellant argued that the incentives paid to M/s Veljan Hydrair Ltd for export coordination should be considered as 'sales promotion' services, making them eligible for Cenvat Credit. The Adjudicating Authority had erroneously classified these as 'sales commission' services, denying the credit based on the case law of CCE Ahmedabad-II vs Cadila Healthcare Ltd. The Tribunal found that the activities undertaken by Veljan, including canvassing and procuring orders, constituted sales promotion. The Tribunal also referenced CBIC Circular No. 943/4/2011-CX and Notification No. 02/2016, which clarified that sales promotion includes services by way of sale of dutiable goods on commission basis. The Tribunal concluded that the Appellant was eligible for Cenvat Credit on sales incentives paid, allowing the appeal for Rs. 1,11,99,110.2. Denial of Cenvat Credit on Various Input Services:The Appellant contended that the denial of Cenvat Credit on services like Consulting Engineer, Telecommunication, and Stockbroker was due to improper verification of documentary evidence by the Adjudicating Authority. The Tribunal remanded the matter to the Adjudicating Authority to verify the eligibility of Cenvat Credit on these services, including Consulting Engineer (Rs. 62,595), Telecommunication (Rs. 2,155), Stockbroker (Rs. 5,324), Company Secretary/Chartered Accountant Services (Rs. 1,041), Insurance Services (Rs. 1,039), and Courier (Rs. 308).3. Denial of Cenvat Credit for Not Adducing Evidence:The Tribunal remanded the issue of denied Cenvat Credit for services like Annual Maintenance of Xerox machines (Rs. 74,200), Car rentals (Rs. 514), Renting of Immovable property (Rs. 1,29,169), and Tour operating services (Rs. 46,208) due to lack of evidence, instructing the Adjudicating Authority to verify the documentary evidence.4. Denial of Cenvat Credit on Renting of Office Building Used by Other Group Companies:The Tribunal remanded the issue of Cenvat Credit denial for renting office buildings (Rs. 64,374) used by other group companies for further verification by the Adjudicating Authority.5. Denial of Cenvat Credit for Billing in the Name of Units/Service Provided to Other Units:The Tribunal remanded the issue of Cenvat Credit denial for billing in the name of units/service provided to other units (Rs. 19,724) for verification by the Adjudicating Authority.6. Denial of Cenvat Credit Taken Twice:The Tribunal remanded the issue of Cenvat Credit taken twice (Rs. 573) for verification by the Adjudicating Authority.7. Denial of Cenvat Credit Due to Service Tax Registration No. Not Mentioned in the Invoice:The Tribunal noted that the Cenvat Credit denial for Service Tax Registration No. not mentioned in the invoice (Rs. 2,044) was already admitted and paid by the Appellant.8. Denial of Cenvat Credit on Bills in the Name of Other Companies:The Tribunal noted that the Cenvat Credit denial on bills in the name of other companies (Rs. 10,39,607) was already admitted and paid by the Appellant.9. Denial of Cenvat Credit Without Specified Documents:The Tribunal noted that the Cenvat Credit denial without specified documents (Rs. 3,820) was already admitted and paid by the Appellant.10. Denial of Cenvat Credit Without Documents:The Tribunal noted that the Cenvat Credit denial without documents (Rs. 1,22,335) was already admitted and paid by the Appellant.11. Invocation of Extended Period of Limitation:The Appellant argued that the invocation of the extended period of limitation was unjustified as all facts were recorded and made available to the Department. The Tribunal did not specifically address this issue in the final order.Conclusion:(a) Cenvat Credit taken on incentives paid - Appeal allowed.(b) Cenvat Credit in respect of various services - Matter remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for verification.The appeal was disposed of accordingly.
TaxTMI 