2019 (4) TMI 933

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....after referred to as "the Tribunal") in Appeal No. 268 of 2008, claiming the following substantial questions of law:- (i) Whether the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal disallowing the Cenvat Credit is legal when there is no dispute with respect to payment of Service Tax and its utilization in providing the output service? (ii) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal is correct in disallowing the credit solely on the grounds that the invoices do not have complete particulars when they could have directed the Adjudicating Authority to verify the same in view of specific provisions of Rule 9(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules? (iii) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal is correct in holding that the extended period of limitation is....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er and complete address. A notice dated 14.11.2006 (Annexure A-4) was issued to the appellant to show cause as to why the service tax amounting to Rs. 13,51,976/- for the period from 1.4.2005 to 30.9.2005 be not recovered. The appellant furnished reply dated 4.12.2006 (Annexure A-5) to the said show cause notice. The Adjudicating Authority vide order dated 12.1.2007 (Annexure A-6) disallowed the Cenvat Credit and confirmed the demand of service tax of Rs. 13,51,976/- along with interest and also imposed a penalty of equal amount of Rs. 13,51,976/- under Section 78 of the Act. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) along with an application for waiver of pre-deposit. The Commissioner (Appeals) dire....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ellant submitted that the original invoices had been lost and Cenvat Credit was claimed on the basis of the photocopies of the receipts issued by the India Airlines which was wrongly disallowed by the authorities below. He has placed reliance upon the judgment of Jammu and Kashmir High Court in Shivam Electrical Industries v. Union of India, OWP-928-2017 and MP-1-2017 decided on 23.8.2017. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue supported the order passed by the authorities below. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we do not find any merit in the appeal. 6. The Adjudicating Authority disallowed the Cenvat Credit to the appellant by noticing that the appellant had availed the credit on the basis of photo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....w the address of the person receiving taxable services, description, classification and value of taxable service provided and registration number and, therefore, these receipts cannot be treated as valid document under provisions of Rule 9(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Thus, it is evidence that the receipts on which credit was availed are not valid documents for taking cenvat credit in terms of provisions of Rule 9 (1) or 9(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004." 8. The Tribunal while affirming the aforesaid findings of fact recorded by the Adjudicating Authority and the Commissioner (Appeals), had in para 11 to 13 held as under:- "11. The questions in para 9 above are listed just to demonstrate the importance of insisting on a....