2016 (5) TMI 309

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ble services i.e. Business Auxiliary Services (BAS) under Service Tax Registration No.AABCD7085NST001. Vide the Certificate of Registration dated 10.11.2009, the Issuing Authority have put a remark as this certificate is issued incorporating the changes intimated by the applicant and the previous certificate of registration being Registration No.AABCD4746QST001 issued on 03.01.2007 stands cancelled. During the course of Audit, it is noticed that the appellant have taken Cenvat credit of Rs. 2,42,738/- on the strength of invoices, which was addressed to M/s Drishtee Dot Com Ltd., M-3/17, S. K. Puri, Patna, , whereas the appellant is a company registered at New Delhi having its other office at Noida, (NCR). 2.1 In reply to the show-cause n....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ct on record, but erroneously, concluded that the appellant is not one, but two separate entity. First registration certificate under the Service Tax, was issued with Registration No. AABCD4746QST001 issued in the name of M/s Drishtee Dot Com Ltd. at A-11, Sector 2, Noida, whereas subsequent, registration certification dated 07.12.2009, has been issued with Regn.No.AABCD7085NST001 in the name of M/s Dristree Development and Communication Ltd. at A-8A, Sector 62, Noida. As the premises are different, it was held that the credit on which the input services utilized by one unit, cannot be availed by other unit for providing output services. Accordingly, the proposed demand was confirmed along with equal amount of penalty of Rs. 2,84,501/- unde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... ld.A.R. for the revenue relies on the impugned order and states that under the facts and circumstances, the appellant is responsible of the errors and confusion created. He further points out that the in view of invoices, all in the old name and in absence of adequate clarification from the service provider and further, he points out that the registration number of service provider, is also not mentioned on the invoices, accordingly, disallowance is justified. 7. Having considered the rival contentions, I find that the issue of PAN numbers and two premises had not been brought out in the SCN. It appears from the fact in OIO that the SCN was issued for disallowing Cenvat credit on rental services as there was old name of the assessee com....