TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (2) TMI 22
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t appellant is engaged in the business of construction of residential complex and other amenities and it has been availing CENVAT credit on eligible input services. Audit Officer of CERA, Mumbai, during the investigation of records of appellant for the period between financial years 2010-11 to 2012-13 for subsequent periods, found rent-a-cab service and telephone charges of Rs. 331/- paid for its guest house as inadmissible. Respondent-department issued a show-cause notice dated 15.06.2016 on the appellant demanding the amount along with interest and penalty as per Rule 14 and 15 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 'read with proviso to Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994'. The matter was adjudicated upon and the duty demand along with inte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... recipient cannot be appreciated in as much as motor vehicles are admittedly capital goods in terms of Rule 2(a) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. He challenged the adjudication order on the ground that the Adjudicating Authority had travelled beyond the scope of show-cause notice and also the same is barred by limitation as during the relevant period of dispute, decision of Hon'ble Tribunal and Hon'ble High Court were in favour of appellant in respect of eligibility of CENVAT credit on rent-a-cab service for which the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) is liable to be set aside. 4. In response to such submissions, Shri Dilip Shinde, learned Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the respondent-department has supported the reasoning a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....his order. Further referring to clarification on mandatory pre-deposit, while filing appeals, vide F. No. 15/CESTAT/General/2013- 14 dated 28.08.2014 containing instructions that mandatory deposit of duty confirmed can be made from CENVAT credit account, he has given his finding that appellant had failed to produce any evidence of reversal of the same amount of Rs. 5,78,923/- and failed to produce protest letter to substantiate the same. These findings appear contradictory to each other as reversal of CENVAT credit was affirmatively stated to have been made and evidencing the same, a chart showing CENVAT credit including closing balance filed vide Annexure-6 was produced. No reason was forthcoming as to why the same was not accepted by the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Audit, such suppression won't have come to the knowledge of department by the CERA Audit. 7. To refute this finding, in placing reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mega Cabs Pvt. Ltd. Vs. UOI and Anr. - [2016 (43) STR 67 (Del.)], the learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that in the absence of authority under Finance Act, 1994 CAG is not empowered to Audit on the Service Tax assessees. Be that as it may, going by the basic statutory audit procedure, the purpose of audit, as available in the Manual published by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India in respect of EA audit and CERA audit under Chapter 17 is that the idea behind such conduct of verification is to reasonably ensure that n....