TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (10) TMI 198
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it, noticed that the appellant provided taxable services namely Storage and Warehousing Service, Cargo Handling Service and Business Auxiliary Service in respect of agricultural produces and not reversed back the service tax credits of input services received on account of these services which fall under the category of exempted services. It was further contended by the Department that since the appellant provided both taxable and exempted services the Cenvat input and input service credit on common inputs need to be reversed on the input services going into the exempted services. It was further mentioned that the appellant neither maintained separate record in terms of Rule 6 (2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 nor have paid the amount as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The appellant are before us against the impugned order-in-original dated 29 January 2015. 2. The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant has submitted that appellant had availed the Cenvat credit during the period October 2008 to June 2012 according to Rule 6 (3A) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 by reversing the proportionate amount of Cenvat credit attributable to exempted services and utilized the remaining amount of the Cenvat credit for payment of the service tax against the taxable services. It has further been submitted that appellant have submitted a declaration to the Department as is required in terms of Rule 6 (3A) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. 3. The learned Advocate has further submi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ice from the appellant. 5. It has also vehemently opposed by the learned Advocate that in the facts and circumstances of the matter the provisions of willful suppression with an intention to evade payment of service tax or to avail wrong Cenvat credit on the part of the appellant cannot be invoked for applying extended period of limitation under Section 73 (1) of the Finance Act, 1994 and it was blatantly wrong on the part of the Commissioner to impose penalty on the appellant by invoking the provisions of Rule 15 of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 readwith Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 as element of any fraud, mis-declaration, suppression of facts etc. are not present in this matter and the appellant have already made a declaration t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ned Advocate has further stressed that as per Rule 6 (3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 every appellant in similar circumstances have three options which also include the payment in terms of Rule 6 (3A) of the Cenvat Credit Rules which provides that the assessee is providing an output service is entitled to reverse back the Cenvat credit for every month equivalent to amount of Cenvat credit attributable to input used in or in relation to exempted services. Since the appellant have already reversed back the proportionate Cenvat credit it is wrong on the part of Department to demand Cenvat credit calculating on the basis of the value of the exempted services. The learned Advocate in support of his argument has relied on following decisions ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he fact that appellant have furnished Cenvat credit register for the period April 2009 to June 2012 which indicate that they have regularly been reversing the proportionate amount of the Cenvat credit taken on the common inputs which have gone into exempted output services. In this regard, we are of the view once the appropriate reversal have been made under Rule 6 (3A) of the Cenvat Credit Rules any procedural violations of minor nature would be of in-consequential nature and will not dis-entitle the assessee from availing the Cenvat credit of the common inputs for which they have already been making a regular reversal of proportionate credits. We also take note of the fact that the Department has nowhere mentioned in entire proceedings th....