TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (7) TMI 168
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... A show cause notice dated 17/12/2005 was issued to the respondent alleging thereunder that they have wrongly availed Cenvat credit amounting to Rs. 15,74,528/- on the ineligible input service rendered by the sales agents/commission agents during the period December 2014 to October 2015. They were called upon to show cause and explain as to why :- (i) Cenvat credit amounting to Rs. 15,74,528/- (S. Tax 15,55,681/- + Edu. Cess Rs. 12,565/- + SHE Cess Rs. 6,282/-) wrongly availed by them should not be recovered from them under Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 readwith Section 11A (1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 ; (ii) Interest on wrongly availed Cenvat credit should not be recovered from them under Rule 14 of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of clarification dated 29/04/2011 in Notification dated 03/02/2016 it can safely conclude that the activity of commission agent for selling of goods/products of the respondent/assessee is squarely covered under the scope of definition of input services provided under Rule 2 (l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. As such, the respondent/assessee was entitled to avail the credit and the same has been correctly availed. 4. I have heard learned DR for the Department and learned Advocate for the respondent/assessee and perused the record. 5. The issue involved in the instant appeal is whether the commission paid to the sales/commission agents is related to promotion of any activity specified in the inclusive part of the definition of input ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce Act, 1994 (32 of 1994), the Central Government hereby makes the following rules further to amend the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, namely :- 1. (1) These rules may be called the CENVAT Credit (Second Amendment) Rules, 2016. (2) They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette. 2. In the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 (here-in-after referred to as the said rules), in rule 2, in clause (l), after sub-clause (C), the following Explanation shall be inserted, namely :- "Explanation. - For the purpose of this clause, sales promotion includes services by way of sale of dutiable goods on commission basis.". 3. In the said rules, in rule 3, in sub-rule (4), after the sixth p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....claratory in nature and effective retrospectively. The relevant paragraph of the said decision has been extracted as under :- "20. But, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Cadila Healthcare Ltd. (supra) was unable to concur with the contrary view taken by the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana v. Ambika Overseas (supra). The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court held that this issue is concerned, the question is answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. In this background, legislature explained the meaning of the sales promotion by inserting Explanation in Rule 2(l) of Rules, 2004 and declared that sales promotion includes services by way of sale of dutiable ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....:- "4. After hearing both the parties, we note that identical issue has come up before the Tribunal in the case of M/s Mangalam Cement Ltd. vs. CCE, Udaipur. The Tribunal vide final order No. 56683-56685/2017 dated 28/08/2017 held as under :- "4. With regard to availment of Cenvat credit on the commission paid for sale promotion activities, the CBEC vide Circular No. 943/4/2011-CX. Dated 29/04/2011 has clarified that Cenvat credit is admissible on the services of the sale of the dutiable goods on commission basis. The said circular was endorsed by the Central Government vide Notification No. 2/2016-CE (NT) dated 03/02/2016. In the case of Cadila Healthcare Ltd. (supra), the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court had not referred to th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he different views of the High Courts. Taking into circumstances under which the Explanation was inserted in Rule 2(l) of Rules, 2004 and consequence of the Explanation to extend the benefit to the assessee as per Board Circular, we hold that the Explanation inserted in Rule 2(l) of Rules, 2004 by Notification No. 2/2016-CX (N.T.) (supra) should be declaratory in nature and effective retrospectively". 5. In view of the above settled position and law, we do not find any merits in the impugned orders. Accordingly, after setting aside the same, we allow the appeals in favour of the appellants". 10. Thereafter again this issue came up before this Tribunal in a batch of matters in which this Tribunal vide final order Nos. 51412-51426....