AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (11) TMI 1071
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rities. On verification of the financial records of the assessee by the audit party of the Central Excise Department, it was observed that the assessee and their sister concerns viz. M/s. JRG Securities Ltd., M/s. Inditrade Business Consultants Ltd. and M/s. JRG Fincorp Ltd. are having branches all over India; that in most of these branches one or more or even all of these sister concerns are functioning; that Head Officers of the assessee and their sister concerns are also functioning commonly (with common staff and management); that the input services provided to aforesaid branches and head officers, by services providers, are commonly used by all the four entities and that these services include telephone charges, net connectivity charges (other than leased lines), rent, payroll outsourced agency, house keeping, courier, banking, recruitment charges, maintenance & repair etc. it was also seen that there are input services which are exclusively used by the assessee, these being, sub-brokerage commission, transaction charges in NCDX and NMCE, leased line (V-SAT-VPN) and MPLS charges, SMS services to commodity clients, exchange annual subscription- MCX, NCDEX etc. On verification, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....des and perused the material on record. 4.1. The learned counsel for the appellant/assessee submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without properly appreciating the facts and law. He further submitted that the primary dispute in the present case is regarding the availment of CENVAT credit on shared service expenses based on the debit notes issued by the sister concerns. Appellants had availed the CENVAT credit based on the debit notes issued by the sister concerns with respect to sharing of certain common expenses but the Revenue was of the view that the input services were provided by other service providers and not by any of the sister concerns and therefore the availment of cenvat credit based on debit notes issued by the sister concerns is incorrect. The Revenue further alleged that the distribution of expenses among group companies is a business model adopted by the group of companies for better utilization of resources and for minimizing expenses and such mechanism is not covered under the provisions of CCR. The learned counsel further submitted that when the service tax has been discharged by the sister concerns by way of r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... settled that registration is not compulsory for availing cenvat credit. For this submission, he relied upon the decision in the case of State Bank of Patiala Vs. CCE, Chandigarh [2014(34) STR 85 (Tri. Del.)] wherein it was held that while registration is one of the requirements for admissibility of credit, the documentary evidence in support of the claim is also equally to be considered in all material particulars to consider admissibility of cenvat credit. It was also held that when the documents produced in support of claim for cenvat credit were credible evidence, the claim of cenvat credit cannot be denied. He also relied upon the decision in the case of Fraser and Ross Deloitte Centre, Anchorage-II vs. CST-I [2017(6) TMI 911 - CESTAT Bangalore], which was passed on identical issues, wherein the Tribunal held that it is admitted fact that the input services have suffered service tax and cenvat credit can be availed by the appellants and registration is not a mandatory requirement for claiming cenvat credit. He further submitted that registration is merely a procedural requirement and procedural infirmities are no bar on substantial benefit available under law. It is his furthe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the basis of documents issued by another person other than input service provider or ISD. Input service has to be used fully by the person availing cenvat credit and can be availed and utilized only as per the provisions contained in the CCR, even if the assessee has paid service tax on the shared portion of the input service. He also referred to the definition of ISD defined under Rule 2(m) of CCR and also referred to Rule 7 and Rule 9(g) of the CCR which deal with the concept of ISD. He also referred to the Circular No.97/8/2007 dt. 23/08/2007 and also relied upon the following decisions: i. Sunbell Alloys Co. of India Vs. CCE and C, Belapur [2014(34) STR 597 (Tri. Mum.)] ii. Mangalore Refinery & Petrochemicals Vs. CCE, Mangalore [2013(30) STR 475 (Tri. Bang.)] iii. CCE,C&ST, tirupati Vs. Amara Raja Electronics Ltd. [2016(341) ELT 369 (Tri. Hyd.)] iv. Aztec Auto Ltd. Vs. CCE, Madurai [2018(15) GSTL 363 (Tri. Chennai)] 6.1. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record as well as the decisions relied upon by both the parties, we find that the issues raised in the impugned order are in relation t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ayment of service tax on reimbursement of expenses at the end of the service provider and after having accepted the tax as well as the returns, denial of cenvat credit of service tax paid by the service recipient is not justified. We also find that the other objection of the Revenue that the appellants have availed the credit of Rs. 33,47,354/- on input services which are received by the sister concerns and the appellant and the entire credit was availed by the appellant. in fact, the appellants have incurred expenses for input services and have initially availed the entire credit based on the invoices issued by the service provider and thereafter the respective share of expenses from the other sister concerns has been recouped by way of issuing debit notes charging service tax. Further during the course of argument, we asked the learned counsel for the appellant, the following questions: a. whether cenvat credit availed by the appellant based on the debit notes issued by sister concerns matches with the tax paid by the sister concern on debit notes raised on the appellant; b. whether the tax paid on debit notes issued by the appellant on sister concerns does not ....