Tribunal allows CENVAT credit use, payment adjustment in tax dispute

The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Appellant on both issues. They allowed the utilization of CENVAT credit for payment of service tax on import services as the restriction introduced in 2012 did not apply to the disputed period in 2009. Additionally, the Tribunal permitted the adjustment of excess payments in one tax head against short payments in another, following judicial precedents. Consequently, the demand and interest confirmed in the impugned order were set aside, with no penalty imposed on the Appellant. The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was overturned.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Denial of utilization of the CENVAT credit for discharging service tax liability in relation to Import of Service.
2. Denial of inter-adjustment of amount paid within various heads against the liability.

Summary:

Issue 1: Denial of utilization of the CENVAT credit for discharging service tax liability in relation to Import of Service

The Appellant contended that Rule 3(4)(e) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, allows the utilization of CENVAT credit for payment of service tax on any output service. They argued that the restriction under Rule 5 of the Taxation of Services (Provided from Outside India and received in India) Rules, 2006, is limited to availing credit of duty/tax paid on input and input services, and does not extend to the utilization of CENVAT credit for service tax payment. They cited several judicial precedents, including the Tribunal's decision in Kansara Modler Ltd. and the Hon'ble Supreme Court's dismissal of the Revenue's petition against the Rajasthan High Court's judgment, which supported their stance.

The Tribunal observed that the restriction on utilizing CENVAT credit for payment of service tax on import services was introduced only with the Explanation added to Rule 3(4)(e) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, effective from 01.07.2012. Since the period in dispute was 2009, the restriction was not applicable. The Tribunal also referenced the decision in Kansara Modler Ltd., which had attained finality in favor of the Appellant. Thus, the Tribunal held that the utilization of CENVAT credit for payment of service tax on import services by the Appellant was legally tenable and set aside the demand on this count.

Issue 2: Denial of inter-adjustment of amount paid within various heads against the liability

The Appellant argued that they had short paid service tax, education cess, and secondary and higher education cess in some months but made excess payments in other heads. They relied on Circular No. 58/7/2003-S.T., which clarified that wrong accounting codes should not necessitate re-payment of service tax. They cited judicial precedents, including the Hon'ble High Court's decision in Devang Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd., which upheld that payments made with wrong codes should not result in penalties or additional liabilities.

The Tribunal observed that the Appellant had correctly paid the total tax payable during the disputed period. They referenced the Hon'ble High Court of Guwahati's decision in Kamakhya Cosmetics & Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., which allowed the utilization of CENVAT credit of Basic Excise Duty for payment of Education Cess/SHE Cess and vice versa. Applying the same analogy to service tax, the Tribunal held that the excess amount paid in service tax could be adjusted against the short payment in Education Cess/SHE Cess. After adjustment, the short payment of Rs. 895,160/- in January 2008 had already been paid by the Appellant. Thus, the demand on this count was not sustainable.

Conclusion:

Both issues were decided in favor of the Appellant, and the entire demand along with interest confirmed in the impugned order was set aside. Consequently, no penalty was imposable on the Appellant. The appeal filed by the Appellant was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside.

(Pronounced in the open court on 30.08.2023)

---