2013 (11) TMI 1357

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vices common to trading as well as taxable output service. Out of such cenvat credit taken, During the period 01-04-2006 to 01-04-2008 most of the credits related to services which were specified in rule 6 (5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 which allowed 100% of the credit of tax paid on services specified in the sub-rule irrespective of the fact whether the services were utilized partially in exempted services and partially in taxable services. After taking such credit, they were complying with the provisions of extant rule 6(3) of CCR 04 by restricting the utilization of Cenvat credit to the extent of 20% of service tax payable during each period. They were filing the cenvat returns accordingly. The applicant had certain amount of credi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rmed for Rs. 5,93,06,974/-, as per para 6.0 of the impugned order Rs. 5,84,69,919/- can be split up as under: S. No. Ground for denial of credit Amount (Rs.) 1.   Input services which were used exclusively for trading activity 18,98,473   2.   Input services which were used commonly for trading activity and taxable service and hence proportionate credit attributable to trading activity is liable to be recovered 5,40,93,621   3.   Credit taken before making payment to input service provider 24,77,825   Total   5,84,69,919   Aggrieved by the order, the applicant has filed an appeal along with stay petition. 5. Arguing for the applic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mits that payment to the service providers were made in April 2010 and they became eligible for credit from April 2010. So the only issue is about interest for a month which will be a very small amount. 8. We have considered the submissions of both sides. We note that The dispute on the issue whether trading could be treated as an exempted service for the purpose of Cenvat credit stands clarified by CBEC in favour of the appellant. Prima facie, we agree with the advocate for the applicant because credit was taken in accordance with provisions of rule 6(5) as it was existing at the relevant time and in the matter of utilization, applicant was complying with extant rule 6(3) of the rules as it was existing at the relevant time. Cenvat Cred....