TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (12) TMI 644
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....T-II/PK/2015-16 dated 29th June 2015 of Principal Commissioner of Service Tax-II, Mumbai which dropped proceedings for recovery of Rs. 16,08,48,279 while confirming interest liability of Rs. 31,65,740. The show cause notice proposed recovery of the amount dropped in the impugned order under section 73 of Finance Act, 1994, read with rule 14 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, along with interest that was confirmed in the impugned order, besides proposing imposition of penalty under section 76 and 78 of Finance Act, 1994. 2. The issue in the dispute, pertaining to availment of CENVAT credit of the tax paid in value of services procured and used by M/s Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd, a provider of 'general insurance service' and 'insurance aux....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Corporation v. Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai [2014 (36) STR 375 (Tri--Mumbai)] and in Sunflag Filaments Limited v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Vapi [2009 (245) ELT 209 (Tribunal-Ahmadabad)] the recovery was restricted to the interest on the excess credit that was eligible, though not utilizable, at the time of discharge of tax liability. 4. Elaborating upon the grounds of appeal, it is contended by Learned Authorised Representative that the adjudicating authority had failed to decide on the validity of discharge of tax liability by debit of CENVAT credit that was not available to them and that the harmonious reading of the provisions pertaining to assessment and payment of tax with the restriction on utilisation of CENVAT credit ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g to her, it was, therefore, incumbent upon the adjudicating authority to ascertain the excess credit drawn and to recover the same under section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944 besides imposing the mandatory penalty under section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944 arising therefrom. 7. There can be no doubt that the credit availed on the impugned input services cannot be denied as the tax liability has been included in the value made over to the provider of service. Again, there can be no doubt that rule 6(1) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 precludes the availment of credit attributable to input services used for providing exempted services except in circumstances of maintenance of separate accounts for receipt, consumption and inventory and t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es not accrue to the credit of the assessee and the accumulation thereof which could have been utilised after the scheme of computation was altered has not been taken notice of. This principle, laid down by the Tribunal in re Vijayanand Roadlines Ltd, was relied upon in resolving the dispute, identical to the one impugned before us, in re Idea Cellular Ltd thus '4.2 The Appellant have pleaded that if the 20% ceiling on utilization is applied only to credit of services other than the services covered by Rule 6(5) and credit of inputs goods other than capital goods, utilization of credit for payment of service tax, in excess of the ceiling has taken place only in January 2005, March 2005 and May 2005 and this excess utilized credit cannot b....