TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (10) TMI 700
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellant has also registered in respect of GTA services received from the transporters. During the period December, 2005 to April, 2006, the appellant availed Cenvat Credit of Service Tax paid on the services received from the service provider located outside India and having no office in India under reverse charge mechanism. The Revenue is of the view that in terms of Rule 9 (1)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, the appellant has availed Cenvat Credit on the strength of TR-6 Challans whereas Service Tax has been paid much after the period when they received the services from service provider located outside India under reverse charge mechanism. Therefore, in terms of Rule 9(1)(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, they are not entitle to avai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cturer for clearance of - (I) inputs or capital goods from his factory or depot or from the premises of the consignment agent of the said manufacturer or from any other premises from where the goods are sold by or on behalfof the said manufacturer; (II) inputs or capital goods as such; (ii) an importer; (iii) an importer from his depot or from the premises of the consignment agent of the said importer if the said depot or the premises, as the case may be, is registered in terms of the provisions of Central Excise Rules, 2002; (iv) a first stage dealer or a second stage dealer, as the case may be, in terms of the provisions of Central Excise Rules, 2002; or (b) a supplementary invoice, issued by a manufacturer or importer of inp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....case. 7. In view of the above observations, the issue is answered in the favour of the appellant, therefore, we hold that the appellant has correctly availed the Cenvat Credit, no proceedings are required to be initiated against the appellant. 8. In these terms, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief if any. (Dictated and pronounced in the open court) Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) Ms. Surbhi Sinha, Advocate for the Appellant(s) Sh. Satyapal, AR for the Respondent(s) ORDER Per: Ashok Jindal The appellants are in appeal against the impugned order wherein Cenvat Credit sought to be denied to them. Consequently, the duty was demanded and penalties were also imposed on the appellants. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppellants are before me. 3. The Ld. Counsel for the appellants submits that case has been made out against the appellants on the basis of the statement of Rupesh Bansal, Sh. Ramesh Chand Aggarwal and various transporters wherein all have admitted that only invoices were moved, no goods were moved along with invoices. The appellants sought cross-examination of the Sh. Rupesh Bansal and transporters whose statements have been relied upon by the Revenue to allege non receipt of the goods but the same was not granted to them which is violation of principle of natural justice as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in the case Jindal Drugs Pvt. Ltd. Vs. UOI - 2016 (340) ELT 67 (P&H), therefore, the impugned order is to be set ....