Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2019 (7) TMI 1651

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 for unutilized Cenvat credit for the period April, 2014 to June, 2014. The refund claim was filed for Rs. 7,27,52,794/- in respect of various input services which remained unutilized during the period April, 2014 to June, 2014 and hence proportionate unutilized credit against export of goods made during the said period was claimed as refund as per the provisions of Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Appellant further submits that out of refund claim of Rs. 7,27,52,794/-, the department has allowed refund of Rs. 1,75,79,982/- and balance refund of Rs. 5,51,72,812/- has been rejected. 2. The Appellant has contested refund claim rejected to the tune of Rs. 5,51,72, 812/- vide Exci....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uring final product. 4. The Appellant also argued that the show cause notice solely rejected refund application without disputing on the ground that whether credit was eligible or not. It was only in the adjudication order i.e. Order-in-Original, it was the observation of the adjudicating authority that such input services were used for the setting of factory and hence does not quality within the definition of input service as provided in Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Appellant argued that as such denial of credit was not alleged in the Show Cause and thus the same cannot be adopted in Order-in-Original. It a settled legal position that adjudication order cannot go beyond what has been alleged in show cause notice. 5....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ucts, but this does not qualify as Input Service in terms of Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. 8. Let us examine the definition of input services as it stands during two different periods i.e. prior to 28th February, 2011 and post 1st March, 2011. Definition of Input Service Prior to 31st March, 2011 (Old Definition) 2 (l) "Input service" means any service, - (i) used by a provider of taxable service for providing an output service; or (ii) used by a manufacturer, whether directly or indirectly, in or in relation to the manufacture of final products and clearance of final products from the place of removal, and includes services used in relation to setting up, modernisation, renovati....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of removal; but excludes, - (A) service portion in the execution of a works contract and construction services including service listed under clause (b) of section 66E of the Finance Act (hereinafter referred as specified services) in so far as they are used for - (a) construction or execution of works contract of a building or a civil structure or a part thereof; or (b) laying of foundation or making of structures for support of capital goods, except for the provision of one or more of the specified services; or (B) services provided by way of renting of a motor vehicle......." 9. On conjoint reading of above definitions, it can be observed that the substantive part in respect of eli....