TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (4) TMI 60
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ture of Detergent Cake/ Powder, Acid Slurry and Spent Sulphuric Acid. The head office of the appellant is situated at Kanpur and they have got 5/51875/2015-EXISMI several manufacturing units including one at Sahibabad. During the verification of records by the auditors of AGUP, Lucknow in January, 2012, it appeared that appellant have wrongly availed and utilized Cenvat credit of Rs. 22,82,487/- on input services, on invoices issued by ISD, which were not in accordance with the provisions related to ISD as provided in Rule 7 & 7A of CCR, 2004 read with Rule 4 A (2) of S.T. R., 1994. It was also noticed that the appellant have availed Cenvat credit on capital goods of Rs. 1,53, 188/- such goods falling under chapter 73, which appeared that a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r account for the period up to March, 2010, was audited by AGUP Audit Team and also by the Central Excise Audit Team on 31st March, 2010 and 19th July, 2011, in the intervening period no such objection was raised inter-alia evidencing that the desired annexed details were duly examined by them and on being satisfied that Cenvat documents i.e. invoices issued by the ISD were consistent with the provisions of law and the credit availed was found correct, is not sustainable in the facts and circumstances of the case. So far the credit of Rs. 1,53, 188/- with respect to capital goods is concerned. It was observed that these items fall under chapter 73 and are not explicitly covered in the definition of capital goods. The appellant c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....duced below for the sake of brevity. "4A(2) Every input service distributor distributing credit of taxable service shall, in respect of credit distributed, issue an invoice, a bill or, as the case may be, a challan signed by such person authorized by him, for each of the recipient of the credit distributed, and such invoice, bill or, as the case may be, challan shall be serially numbered and shall contain the following, namely, The name, address and registration number of the person providing input services and the serial number and date of invoice, bill, or as the case may be, challan issued under sub-rule (1); The name and address of the said input service distributor; The name and address of the recipient of the credit distributed; ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) is fulfilled. All the three invoices contain the name and address of the input service distributor i.e., M/S Rohit Surfactants Pvt. Ltd., Kanpur. Hence, the requirement of Rule 4A(2) (ii) is fulfilled. All the three invoices contain the name and address of the recipient of the credit distributed, i.e., the appellant. Therefore, the requirement of Rule 4 A (2) (iii) is fulfilled. Lastly, all the three invoices contain the amount of credit distributed. Hence, the requirement of Rule 4 A (2) (iv) is fulfilled. It is not the case of the department that the enclosures of the aforesaid three invoices in question did not contain all the requisite particulars required under the provisions of Rule 4 A (2) of the Service Tax Rules. Hence, the impu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....put Services are received in the factory, he would be denied the benefit of Cenvat credit. Such an interpretation is not tenable. 5. So far Cenvat credit of Rs. is concerned the details of the items are Pre-batcher and Dozers Stand, MS Settler, Part of Machine Barrel, S. S. Barrel & Screw, Jaali and Coupling. It was further argued that capital goods can fall under any chapter of CETA and there is no restriction on goods falling or classifiable under chapter 73, will not qualify for credit as capital goods. It is admitted fact that the items and/or goods have been used in the factory or the manufacture, and further these are in the nature of accessories and components of capital goods. Accordingly, the Cenvat credit was wrongly denied....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd Lattice Type Tower etc. falling under chapter 73 of CETA and credit was sought to be denied by Revenue on the ground of those goods fall under chapter 73. It was held that no doubt as per definition of Rule 2 (a) of CCR, 2004 component spares and accessories 'of the goods specified at SI. No. I & Il are entitled for credit. Whether these items are accessories or not, is to be examined by the user test. It is wrong to deny the Cenvat credit only on the ground that these items fall under chapter 73 of CETA. 6. The Learned A. R. for Revenue have relied on the impugned order. 7. Having considered the rival contentions, I find that the courts below have rejected the Cenvat credit mechanically without application of mind. It is admitted ....