TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (4) TMI 1156
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....artment observed that the appellant has wrongly availed Cenvat Credit on :- (1) Proforma invoice / invoice issued in the name of head office situated at Yashad Bhawan, Udaipur. (2) Those invoices not being the proper documents in terms of Rule 9 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004; (3) On the invoice of Rampal Sahu for the service of providing food facility to the Police Guards ; the said service not being eligible input service under Rule (ii) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002; (4) Availed Cenvat Credit in excess of tax paid on invoice 2. Based on the said observations that the Cenvat Credit amounting to Rs. 2,64,442/- was proposed to be recovered from the appellant along with the interest and proportionate penalty vide Show Cause notice No. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to Rule 9 (2) of Credit Rules has been impressed upon. Learned Counsel has laid emphasis on these decisions 1. Jayco Electricals v CCE & ST, Meerut I [2017 (352) EDLT 271 (Tr-All)]; 2. CC & CE, Vapi v DNH Spinners [2009 (244) ELT 65 (Tri-Ahmd)]; 3. Modern Petrofils vs CCE, Vadodara [2010 (20) STR 627 (Tri-Ahmd)] 7. With respect to the credit on the invoices of Shri Rampal Sahu, it is submitted by the appellant that the service availed from Shri Rampal Sahu were that of hiring of crane instead of food facility for Police Guard. However that was inadvertently mentioned as food facility of Police Guard in books of accounts by mistake. Same was brought to the notice of Adjudicating Authority with all requisite documents even the copy of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fide which could be alleged upon the appellant nor Department could have produced any evidence for the same. The order is alleged to be wrong while invoking the extended period of limitation and also for imposing the penalty upon the appellant. The order under challenge is accordingly prayed to be set aside. And appeal is prayed to be allowed. 9. While rebutting the submissions learned Departmental Representative has laid emphasis upon the findings in paragraph 8 to 11 of the order under challenge where each allegations of the Show Cause Notice have meticulously been dealt with by the Commissioner (Appeals) who has given the justified reason for rejecting the submissions of the appellants before confirming the demand against the appellant.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e same shall be admissible for permitting availment of Cenvat Credit to the manufacture or service provider. Also the documents required under the Rule 9 are not confined to merely invoices but these may be any documents, like bill or challan as issued in terms of Rule 4 (2) A of the Service Tax Rules etc. This particular Rule specifies the amount of information as is required in a particular documents for availment of Cenvat Credit. Thus any documents as required under Rule 4(2)A can be the documents under Rule 9 of Cenvat Credit Rules for entitlement of availing Cenvat Credit. I draw my support from the decisions of this Tribunal in the case of CCE Indore vs Grasim Industries reported as [2011 (24) STR 691(Tri-Del)] and Emmes Metals Pvt L....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cedural compliance. Credit based on such invoices is therefore held available. Findings to this aspect in Order-in-Appeal are liable to be set aside. (iii) Invoices issued by Rampal Sahu in contravention of Rule 9(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, The invoices as annexed on the record are perused. Perusal thereof clarifies that the services mentioned in such invoices is that of hiring of cranes none of the invoices is mentioning any service as that of food facility for police guards to have been availed is found on record. The order under challenge is silent about any such specific invoice. Whatever invoices has been mentioned in the order under challenge are mentioning the nature of service of hiring charges of cranes. Another ground ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lerical mistake regarding the mention of bill number and date for entry at Serial No. 865. Infact credit details of invoice No. 9700255 dated 28.6.2017 relating to Serial No. 867 which was Rs. 4,99.945/- was mentioned in place of Serial No. 865 whereas the invoice amount and service tax as correctly mentioned in each of the entry which is co-relatable to the corresponding invoices. This fact was also brought to the notice of both the lower authorities under a self declaration submitting that there was no excess availment of credit by the appellant and the variation was due to clerical mistake in reporting the bill number and date. 11. It is clear that a substantial benefit of credit on the admittedly paid duty / tax has been denied by the ....