TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (6) TMI 441
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... April 2015 to September 2015, they have transferred Rs. 14,00,000/- in October 2015, Rs. 16,00,000/- in November 2015 and Rs. 11,00,000/- in December 2015 to their RG-23 Part II and utilized the same for payment of Excise Duty on the finished good cleared from their factory. While transferring this amount to RG23 Part-II, they have mentioned that this amount is being transferred on account of "Service Tax input credit from Service Tax Khata". The Department has gone through the relevant Bills, Challans, etc. submitted by the assessee on account of 'Manpower Supply Agency', "Maintenance or Repairing Service", "Security Service Agency's", "GTA Services" etc., during the period October 2015 to December 2015 and has taken the view that they have irregularly availed input service credit totaling to Rs. 41,00,000/- as shown in the ER-I Returns for the period October 2015 to December 2015. The Show Cause Notice alleged that the relevant bills of the service providers in respect of these services reveals that these services were received by the assessee were exclusively used for 'sales, clearance of finished goods beyond the place of removal' and also on account of other post manufacturin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, wherein it has been clarified that the Cenvat Credit accruing on account of input services and capital goods can be utilized by the manufacturer of the goods. 4. He also relies on the case law of S. S. Engineers Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, PUNE-I-2015 (317) E.L.T. 597 (Tri.-Mumbai), wherein it has been held that the manufacturer can also utilize the input tax credit available in the ST-3 account for clearance of their finished goods. Accordingly he submits that cross-utilization of the credit is permissible. 5. The Learned Counsel also relies on the case law of Sumita Tex Spin Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C.Ex. & S.T., Rajkot-2015 (39) S.T.R. 502 (Tri.- Ahmd.). 6. Based on the above details, he submits that the Appeal may be allowed. 7. The Learned AR submits that the issue is not that of simple allegation about transfer of input service Cenvat Credit to RG 23 Part-II and ER-1. He submits that as has been given in a very detailed manner in the SCN, the appellant has been taking Cenvat Credit on various input services which have been used subsequent to the "place of removal" which is not permissible as per Rule 2 (l) of the Cenvat Credit Rule....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ctober, 2015 to November, 2015 & Rs. 11,00,000/- during December 2015 with the remarks "Service Tax input credit from service tax khata from December, 2015" vide entry sl no 510 dated 21.10.2015, 641 dated 30.11.2015 and 75 dated 31.12.2015 respectively in the Form R.G. 23A Part II of Entry Book of Duty Credit register. I hold that noticee have availed credit on strength of entry 'service tax input credit transfer from Service Tax khata' which is not valid entry or documents for availing credit. They actually availed such input service credit without any valid duty paying documents. In terms of Rule 9 (1) of Cenvat credit Rules 2004, it is stipulated that the cenvat credit taken by the manufacturer or the provider of output service or input service distributor, as the case may be on the basis of i) invoices issued by the manufacturer ii) an invoice, a bill or challan issued by a provider of output service or iii) an invoice, bill or challan issued by an input service distributors under rule 4A of the Service Rule 1994. I find that in the instant case, the noticee availed the cenvat credit neither on the basis of an invoice issued by any manufacturer or service provider or o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Goods Transport Agency, Man Power Recruitment Agency, Security Services agency and Services for maintenance or repairing service and on scrutiny of relevant bills, challans, I find that the said services were exclusively used at other premises beyond the of removal of their finished goods from their factory premises and also used for other post manufacturing activities like maintenance & repairing of tools used at TISCO site, Bhilai Steel Plant, B. K. Steel, Gamaria, Lashing Truck and Trailer at Jamshedpur, strapping products at MMSM, VSP, Andhra Pradesh, SSM site RSP, Rourkella, Wire Rod Coil packaging at Angul Odisha mentioning service receiver as Walzen strips Pvt. Ltd. Cast House, A Site, Nalco, Angul. Such activities were carried out by them at a place beyond the place of removal and contrary to the inclusive part of the definition of input service under Rule 2 (l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The activities carried out by them at a place beyond the place of removal which can in no way be considered as used by the said noticee, In terms of definition of 'Input service' under rule 2 (l) of Cenvat credit 2004, the Cenvat credit cannot be availed on the service received....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thority has confirmed the demand. On Appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) has held as under:- 6. I find that the appellant have mainly contended on the ground that :- credit was '' availed on the strength of valid duty paying documents. The credit was transferred from the Service Tax khata to Cenvat account and utilization of the same for payment of central excise duty; supplying of the goods to the buyer and subsequent maintenance of the same and/or undertaking some other works/services in connection with the manufactured goods with the appellant were undoubtedly having nexus with the manufacture of their finished goods. Credit of Service Tax for such services is available. 7. On perusal of the appellant's submissions, I find that they have not produced before me any documentary evidence to show that the impugned input service credit was availed by them on valid duty paying documents. For availing credit, valid duty paid documents are required in terms of rule 9 (1) of the Credit Rules. But the appellant have not produced any such document to establish their case. Further, no logical explanation or any tangible evidence has been adduced by them such input of services....