TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (9) TMI 1083
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he department observed that the appellant had availed/taken Cenvat Credit in respect of input services (i.e. advertisement services, architect services, commission services, landscaping services, housekeeping & maintenance services, postage & courier services, professional services, repair & maintenance services, telephone/mobile services and watch & ward services) while also availing abatement against construction services being provided by them. By virtue of Notification No. 01/2006-ST dated 01.03.2006, no Cenvat Credit was admissible in case abatement was being availed. During the period 2010-11 to 2012-13 (upto June 2012), they had availed CENVAT Credit of Rs.52,19,706/- on various input services. Therefore, a show cause notice (SCN) dated 23.04.2016 for the period 2010-11 to 2012-13 (upto June 2012) was issued to the appellant for demand and recovery of CENVAT Credit wrongly taken and utilized with interest and penalty. The said SCN was adjudicated vide Order in Original No. 15/PA/ADC/GST/DE/2017-18 dated 12.03.2018 wherein the recovery CENVAT Credit of Service tax of Rs. 52,19,706/- under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994, along with applicable interest was confirmed and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ull value charged at full rate for charges such as administrative charges, Development charges, PLC etc. The credit of non-construction input services was availed under this category of services and was utilized for payment of service tax on this output service alone. 3.3 Learned Counsel further submitted that the lower authorities failed to appreciate that when multiple output services were provided by the appellant, the availment of credit was restricted only on Construction of Complex service under Notification No. 01/2006-ST dated 01.03.2006. There was no restriction on availing credit under other category of services and the amount of input service credit availed utilized under Construction Service (zzzh) is NIL during the period 2010-11 to June 2012. Since no credit was availed on input services for payment of service tax on output Construction service, the condition of non- availment of credit as provided under Notification No.1/2006-ST has been fulfilled by the appellant. There is no contravention of the conditions of said Notification. On this ground alone the demand was not justified and is liable to be dropped as the demand is based on assumption and presumption. He f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....omplexes,' is considered taxable but does not qualify for input service credit because it does not require the use of input services as defined by Rule 2(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. This is because no input service is exclusively required for the provision of output services like preferential location, club membership, or other special services. 4.1 Learned Authorized Representative further submitted that the definition of "input service" includes services used by a provider of taxable service for providing an output service, or by a manufacturer in relation to the manufacture of final products. However, the services in question do not meet this definition as they are not exclusively used in the provision of the specified output services. The term "output service" is defined in Sub-rule 2(p) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, as any taxable service provided by a service provider to a customer, excluding certain services referred to in the Finance Act. If a person liable for paying service tax does not provide any taxable service or does not manufacture final products, the service for which they are liable to pay service tax is deemed to be the output service. Based o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for SCN 04/2010 to 09/2010 03.08.2011 03.08.2012 10/2010 to 03/2011 03.08.2011 03.08.2012 04/2011 to 09/2011 17.10.2011 17.10.2012 10/2011 to 0382012 23.04.2012 23.04.2013 04/2012 to 06/2012 20.11.2012 20.11.2013 Once when the ST-3 returns were filed regularly, the Department cannot allege fraud, collusion, wilful mis statement or suppression of facts, and invoke the extended period of time. In the instant case, we observe that the Appellant has regularly filed ST-3 returns consequent upon obtaining Service tax registration. the original authority has failed to give a finding to the effect that considering the facts and circumstances of this case, how extended period is invocable. The impugned order notes that the extended period is invokable as the availment of Cenvat Credit came to the knowledge of the officers during the audit of the records of the appellant. There has been no evidence led by the Department of any positive act of suppression or fraud by the appellant. In this case the Appellant has filed returns regularly and disclosed all information to the department. Thus, we hold that extended period of limitation is not invoc....