2015 (4) TMI 575

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....187/-. 2. The appellant is a partnership firm of Chartered Accountant under the trade name of M/s Rathi Daga. They provide services under the category of 'Practicing Chartered Accountant'. They rendered taxable as well as exempted services and utilised CENVAT credit on input services such as telephone services, insurance, repairs & maintenance of motor car etc. It was detected by Audit that they did not maintain separate accounts for services used in providing taxable and exempted services as required under Rule 6(2) of the CENVAT Credit Rules. The appellant had two options under Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules - either to pay an amount equal to 8% of the value of the exempted services or pay an amount equivalent to the CENVAT c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ice to the extent that the show-cause notice only sought to deny credit on the bills which were not in the name of the firm. Lastly he stated that extended period of limitation cannot be invoked in the absence of mens rea and relied on Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka judgement in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Bangalore Vs. M/s Adecco Flexione Workforce Solutions Ltd. CEA No.101 of 2008, CEA No.102 of 2008. 5. The learned A.R. reiterates the findings of the Commissioner. 6. I have carefully gone through the submissions made by both sides. The first issue to be decided is whether the appellant are required to pay 6% /8% of the value of exempted services under rule 6(3)(i) or they may be allowed to make th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ice. That this would be the amount required to be paid, under Rule 6(3A) is not disputed by Revenue. It would be too harsh to enforce payment of Rs. 24,194/- only because of non payment of the due amount of Rs. 927/- on time as per procedure prescribed in Rule 6(3A). But the conditions do require that option should be exercised in writing to avail the facility and amount of CENVAT credit attributable to exempted goods must be paid provisionally for every month. This was not done by the appellants. No assessee would intentionally evade payment of Rs. 927/-. The appellant have pleaded ignorance about the new provisions and continued to restrict utilisation of CENVAT credit to the tune of 20% as per previous provisions of law. In any case Rule....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and not in the name of firm, the credit cannot be denied, as the expenditure therefore has been incurred from the firm's budget." However, after stating the above, the Commissioner in the Order comes to a finding that the appellant failed to produce documentary evidence that the said vehicles have been used for the purpose of output service only. The Commissioner appears to contradict his own statement. On the one hand he says the expenditure has been incurred from the firm's budget whereas on the other hand he comes to a conclusion that no documentary evidence showing use of vehicles for output services, has been produced. Therefore, I do not agree with the Commissioner's finding. In any case it was never the allegation in the....