TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 747
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (ii) Whether the transfer of service tax credit by UPL, Mumbai, as an ISD to the Appellant without obtaining registration under the Rules is admissible to the Appellant or otherwise for the period covered under the SCN? 2 The brief facts of the case are that the appellant during the period of dispute was inter alia engaged in the manufacture of goods under Chapters 28 and 29 of schedule of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1995. The Head Office of the appellant at Mumbai was purchasing the various inputs services and distributing to various factories of the appellant. The appellant during the period of dispute was availing the Cenvat credit of the duty paid on inputs, raw material, capital goods and Service tax paid on input services in ter....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ral Excise Act. In the said order it was held as under:- a. Photocopy of invoices of various service providers issued in favour of the appellant's Head Office, which in turn has merely prepared statement cannot be treated as a valid document for the purpose of taking credit in terms of Rule 9 of the CCR. b. The appellant's Head Office was not registered as an ISD under the Registration Rules and in view thereof the Head Office cannot distribute credit under the cover of invoice, bill or challan terms of Rule 4A(1)(i) of the Rules. 3. Shri. Mihir Mehta, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that as regard the photocopy of invoices the same is not relevant for allowing the credit to the appellant as the Head Office....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....redit in excess of the inputs services purchased by its Head Office or that the appellant had not complied with the provisions prescribed under Rule 7 of the Cenvat Credit Rules. 3.1 Without prejudice, he submits that the purported finding that the appellant had not discharged the onus to prove that the credit has not been availed on the same invoices by more than one manufacturing unit of the appellant is without any basis and purely on surmises and conjectures. In any event, there no was no allegation to this effect in the show cause notice. He submits that the appellant's Head Office had complete record of taking and distributing the credit which shows that the ISD had not transferred the credit in excess of the credit availed. The reco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed that credit cannot be denied for mere procedural irregularities such as lack of registration of the ISD. He also made submission on limitation interest and penalty. 4. Shri. Dinesh M Prithiani, Learned Assistant Commissioner (Authorized Representative) appearing on behalf of the revenue reiterates the finding of the impugned order. He further submits that all the submissions and documents relying on by the appellant have not been submitted before the original authority, therefore, the matter needs to be remanded. 5. We have carefully considered the submission made by both the sides and perused the records. In the present case the Cenvat Credit was denied on two count:-1) That the appellant have availed the Cenvat Credit on the strength....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was in co-operated the statement, the statement contains all the details as required under Rule 4A, therefore, on the basis of such statement credit is admissible. We further find that the said statement is also document which contains all the details as required under Rule 4A at the same it is valid document under Rule 9 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. We further find that issuance of documents under Rule 4A is a procedural requirement and substantial benefit like Cenvat Credit cannot be denied on the basis of procedural infraction. As regard, the issue that the appellant Head Office was not registered as an ISD, therefore, the distribution of the credit is not admissible as Cenvat Credit to the appellant, we find that there is no dispute ab....