2012 (10) TMI 160

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s follows. 2.1 Credit taken on the basis of Advice Transfer Debit issued by the central procuring offices, involving credit of Rs. 5,72,79,745/-. The statement of the Appellants is that they have a system of procuring hardware equipments on centralised basis and they transferred such equipment under cover of an Advice Transfer Debit to different exchanges from where services are provided. Based on the said document, the concerned office took credit of duty paid on equipments and used it for payment of tax on services rendered from such office. The case of the Revenue is that Advice Transfer Debit is not a prescribed document under Rule 9 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and hence the credit cannot be allowed. The counsel submits that the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of 20% of credit taken on inputs and input services and therefore the demand is not maintainable. 2.3 Service tax on value of Leased Circuit Services - the credit involved on this issue is Rs. 38,77,988/-. The counsel submits that the service became taxable only from 1.6.2007 when section 65(l09a) defining Telecommunication Service was amended to include such service. The department is proposing to levy tax on amounts received for rendering of such service prior to that date. He concedes that part of the value of such services were realised after 1.6.2007. The Appellants argue that service tax is to be paid only if the service was chargeable at the time when the service was provided. Since that is not the case the Counsel submits tha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... made in the entry at Section 65(l05)(l09a). This amendment made it very clear that leased circuit services will be covered by the said entry. But that cannot be a reason for concluding that such services were not taxable prior to the said date. 3.4 In respect of the claim regarding interest on delayed payments the contention of A.R. is that the Appellants did not produce any documents to show that tax was paid correctly on the basis of bills realised. So he contest that interest is payable. 4. We have considered arguments on both sides. We find that the issue of credits taken on ATD has been a subject matter of many appeals filed by BSNL and waiver of pre-deposit has been granted in such cases as in Appeal No. 308/2010, 1382/2011 and....