2019 (2) TMI 586

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sed of by this common order. The details of appeals are given below:- Appeal No. Period Amount involved ST/20329/2018 April 2013 to March 2015 Rs.18,48,613/- ST/21221/2018 April 2015 to June 2017 Rs.25,25,815/- For the sake of convenience, the facts of appeal No.ST/20329/2018 are taken for discussion. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are holders of service tax registration for provision of 'Business Support Service, Business Auxiliary Service, Management or Business Consultant Service, Renting of Immovable Property Service etc.". They are availing CENVAT credit facility under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. During the course of audit of their records for the period April 2013 t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... above mentioned services as input service appeared to be irregular and hence credit availed appeared to be ineligible. The total ineligible credit availed by the appellant worked out to Rs. 18,48,613/- as per details / records submitted by them vide their letter dt. 20/05/2016. On these allegations, a show-cause dt. 03/06/2016 was issued to the appellant proposing to recover ineligible cenvat credit of Rs. 18,48,613/- availed and utilized for the period April 2013 to March 2015 along with interest and penalty. After following the due process, the original authority vide order dt.31/03/2017 confirmed the demand along with interest and also imposed penalty of Rs. 9,24,307/-. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant filed appeal before the Comm....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Support Services. He also submitted that with regard to other services procured by the appellant such as software licence, security charges, services for salary purposes, training expenses, consultant fee and other such services which is received by the appellant for group of company as a whole and on the basis of usage of service, the cost related to such usage is recovered by way of debit note along with service tax and the said taxes are remitted under Business Support Services. It is his further submission that the CENVAT credit availed is not on the basis of debit note issued to its sister concern / group company, instead it is on the basis of valid invoice issued by respective service provider. But both the authorities below have fai....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f debit note issued to the sister concern but the same was availed on the basis of valid invoices issued by the respective service providers. The cenvat credit availed by the appellant have been understood as output tax of the appellant and consequently demanded the tax, interest along with imposition of penalty. Further I find that the appellant has availed the cenvat credit on the basis of invoices issued by the service providers which is a valid document in terms of Rule 9(1)(a) of the CENVAT Credit Rules. Further I find that the appellant has availed the CENVAT credit to the extent the expense was related to other group company and the cost was split and recovered by way of debit notes along with applicable service tax and the cenvat cr....