ITC ON CAPITAL GOODD

[NAMAN DOKANIA]

A company registered in Jaipur providing service of transportation all over india, purchased vehicle in Bihar for transportation. The Invoice contains excise duty with billing as The name of the company and address of their site office at Bihar. The company makes billing from Jaipur and all accounts are maintained in Jaipur itself. Can CENVAT CREDIT be disallowed on this vehicle as the premise address mentioned in the invoice is not of the regiatered premise?

[KASTURI SETHI]

Dear Querist,

What is the status of registration ? Whether Centralised registration or not ? Pl. clarify.

[NAMAN DOKANIA]

Thery are not having Centralised registration, but they are Providing Services like any other consulancy service company, and maintaining books of accounts and other at their principal place of business only

[KASTURI SETHI]

This is procedural lapse only.

[NAMAN DOKANIA]

Can you quote some case law please.

[KASTURI SETHI]

I shall trace out and post here. Meanwhile, elaborate your query so that you should get most relevant case law.

[NAMAN DOKANIA]

An Assessee, a Pvt Ltd Company is registered under Service Tax in Jaipur(Single Registration), providing service of transportation all over India. It has its site office at Jharkhand as well and registered office(MCA) at Kolkata.

The assessee purchased vehicle with Excise Duty duly displayed on the invoices and claimed CENVAT on the same on March 2017. The invoices were billed to Jharkhand Site office with the company name duly entered into the same. The assessee then, claimed the said ITC balance in their TRAN-1 in GST registered in Jharkhand.

Department claiming that, the ITC is not allowed, since the same was purhcased at Jharkhand address while the billing should have been done at Jaipur address, and hence, disallowing the Credit.

Can this credit be disallowed, just because the address is wrong?? No where inthe CCR RUles mentions the same, it say only the premise address shoudl be mentioned in the invoice.

[KASTURI SETHI]

Details are enough for me. I shall trace out relevant case laws and post ASAP.

[KASTURI SETHI]

SH.NAMAN DOKANIA Ji,

Peruse the following case law thoroughly (word for word). Also go through the case laws relied upon/metioned in this judgement. You will have to work hard to get relief. If any doubt or further query arises, let me know in this forum.I shall revert immediately.

2020 (3) TMI 1304 - CESTAT BANGALORE HICAL TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX.-I, BANGALORE

[Sadanand Bulbule]

Dear Sethi Sirji

I appreciate your relentless efforts to provide the authenticated solutions to the needy querists. This is conspicuous in the instant case. What is more commendable is the way you have interacted with the querist to frame the query in the right perspective and then to provide the effective solutions. Keep enlightening.

Thank you very much on behalf of all querists.

[KASTURI SETHI]

Sh. Sadanand Bulbule Ji,

Sir, I am all praise for your impulsive expression. Par excellence. Deepest regards.

K.L.SETHI

AI Summary

Input tax credit admissibility where invoice lists non-registered premise; challenge to credit disallowance on address ground. Whether Input Tax Credit/CENVAT credit on a purchased vehicle may be denied solely because the supplier's invoice shows the assessee's site office address rather than the registered premise. The assessee, with single registration, purchased a vehicle billed to a site office in another State and claimed credit; the department challenges entitlement on the ground of incorrect invoice address. Tribunal authority (CESTAT Bangalore, Hical Technologies) is recommended for assessing whether such a procedural lapse alone defeats the credit claim.