TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (12) TMI 1096
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ity dropping proceedings for recovery of Rs. 14,86,214/- in show cause notice dated 18th June 2012. The appellant, M/s Zapak Digital Entertainment Ltd, who are providers of various services, had taken credit of service tax included in invoices issued by M/s BVI HR Practice Pvt Ltd, from whom 'anpower recruitment and supply agency service' had been procured and who, upon investigation, were found to have failed to discharge their obligation to deposit the service tax dues charged from their customers. The original authority held that the appellant-assessee had received the services and having discharged with contractual obligations to make payment, no specific provisions of law prevented the appellant-assessee, as recipient of service, from ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aid document have been received and accounted for in the books of the account of the receiver, he may allow the CENVAT credit;' ordered the demand 3. Reliance was also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in Ellen Ferrous Castings Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore [2014 (305) ELT 114 (Mad) which disallowed CENVATA credit. 4. Revenue is in appeal against non-imposition of penalty under rule 15(3) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and has not objected to invoking section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 either. M/s Zapak Digital Entertainment Ltd, appellant claims to have substantially complied with the provisions of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and submitted that technical lapses, such as non-verificati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....x v. Juhi Alloys Ltd [2014 (302) ELT 487 (All.)] and the decision of the Karnataka High Court in Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore - I v. Bhuwalka Alloys Pvt Ltd [2012 (281) ELT 213 (Kar.)]. The Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in re Juhi Alloys Ltd held that : '7. In the present case, both the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal have given cogent reasons to indicate that the assessee had taken reasonable steps to ensure that the inputs in respect of which he has taken the Cenvat credit are goods on which the appropriate duty of excise, as indicated in the documents accompanying the goods, has been paid. Admittedly, in the present case, the assessee was a bona fide purchaser of the goods for a price which included the duty ele....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er actually duty has been paid on the inputs by the supplier. No business can be carried out like this, and the law does not expect the impossible." 8. The judgment of the Division Bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court in A.B. Tools Limited v. Commissioner of Central Excise - 2010 (256) ELT 382 (H.P.), on which reliance has been placed by the revenue, does not indicate that any contrary view of the law has been taken. 9. Ultimately, the issue in each case is whether, within the meaning of Rule 9(3) of the Rules of 2004, the assessee has taken reasonable steps to ensure that the inputs in respect of which he has taken Cenvat credit were goods on which appropriate duty of excise was paid. Once it is demonstrated that reas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....roduced by the assessee contains all the necessary particulars. The authority has not recorded any finding that there is no such dealer in existence or that no inputs were supplied by him or that any duty was paid on such inputs. There is also no finding that the inputs were not received in the factory premises or it was not used in the manufacturing process. In the absence of any such finding and all those facts having been established the Tribunal held that the benefit of Cenvat credit cannot be denied to the dealer who has paid the duty. In that view of the matter, we do not see any justification to interfere with the well considered passed by the Tribunal. Thus the substantial questions of law is answered in favour of the assessee and a....