TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (1) TMI 142
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....certain equipments installed at other SSAs and such credit cannot be allowed because the equipments were not used in the premises of the entity paying service tax namely BSNL Salem. Revenue proposed to deny CENVAT credit on such equipment installed in other SSAs. After due proceedings, a service tax demand of Rs.1,15,86,320/- is confirmed for the period 2005 - 06 and for the period 2006 - 07 along with interest. Further, a penalty of Rs,10,000/- is imposed under Rule 15 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. 2. This is a second round of litigation. In the first round of litigation when the appellants came up in appeal before the Tribunal in S/134/2007, the Tribunal directed as under:- "4. After considering the submissions, w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ontended that M/s. BSNL renders telephone service to their subscribers all over the country from any SSA by making use of capital goods installed anywhere in the country, This argument is technology-based and the same has to be examined ." 2. Based on this remand order, the adjudicating authority has passed the present impugned order. On the issues raised by the Tribunal, the adjudicating authority gave finding as under:- "9.11. The Hon'ble CESTAT have also directed to address the aspects whether CENVAT credit on the same goods could be taken by other SSAs where these goods were installed and in the event of the capital goods being removed as such, who will pay the duty thereon. On the former question, it is to be obser....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....remises of BSNL and not moved out of such premises. 4. The counsel for the appellant submits that all the SSAs belong to the same legal entity namely BSNL. He points out that as per Rule 2(a)(A) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, there is no condition that the equipment used for providing output service should be installed in the premises of the assessee unlike in the case of capital goods used in the manufacture of excisable products. Further, it is his argument that the premises where the equipment belong to BSNL and from such premises also taxable service is provided. It is his contention that so long as the equipment is used by the output service provider for providing taxable service, CENVAT credit cannot be denied. It is also his contenti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....6. We have considered arguments on both sides. Firstly, we notice that if the DGM (Projects), Salem followed the procedure of getting registered as "input service distributor" and then distributed the credit to SSA Salem there was nothing wrong in the credit availed by the appellant. Basically the issue involved is one of procedures and not a case of mis-utilisation of any ineligible credit. Further, we note that there has not been any distribution of credit involved because of the entire credit taken at one location was taken in one office making it easy for Revenue to conduct verification as may be necessary. The argument of the appellants that the premises where the equipments are used belong to BSNL and not to any other party and it is ....