2024 (10) TMI 817

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....L/2015-16 dated 29.02.2016 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Service Tax-I, Kolkata. 2. The facts of the case are that the Respondent M/s. Price Waterhouse Coopers Private Limited are engaged in providing "Management Consultancy Services" falling under Section 65 (105) (r) of Finance Act, 1994. During the material period, the Respondent had made payment of Service Tax to the tune of Rs. 4,20,21,467/- under Section 66A of Finance Act, 1994 and availed credit of the amount of Service Tax paid by them. Audit conducted on the books of accounts of the Respondent opined that the Respondent has availed the credit of service tax paid under Section 66A in contravention of Rule 3 (1) (ix) of CENVAT Credit Rule, 2004. Accordingly, it was alle....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... person belonging to India, are taxed in the hands of Indian residents. Before enactment of Section 66A, there was no such provision in the Act, and, therefore, the respondents had no authority to levy Service Tax on the members of the petitioner's association. Therefore, it is quite clear that prior to enactment of Section 66A with effect from 18.04.2006, no statutory legal provision existed to levy and collect Service Tax from the recipients of service from overseas service providers and as such there is no question of availing CENVAT Credit against Service Tax paid on input services by the recipients of service for the period prior to 18.04.2006. (iii) In the instant case, the Respondent has paid Service Tax under Reverse Charge....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... [2016-TIOL-576-CESTAT-Mum] (ii) Alcatel Lucent India Ltd vs Commissioner of Service Tax, [2021 (2) TMI 157-CESTAT-New Delhi] 4.3. In view of the decisions cited above, the Respondent prayed for upholding the impugned order and rejecting the appeal file by Revenue. 5. Heard both sides and perused the appeal documents. 6. In the instant case, we observe that the Respondent has paid Service Tax under Reverse Charge Mechanism in terms of Section 66A of Finance Act, 1994, and has availed CENVAT Credit against such payments of Service Tax during the period from 2004-05 to 2007-08. In the impugned order, the Ld. adjudicating authority has dropped the demands raised in the Notice and allowed the CENVAT Credit availed by the Respo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Section 66A is not a charging section and the same has also been made clear by circular 354/148/2009-TRU dated 16.07.2009 and in the said circular CBEC has made it clear that there is no mistake or omission in that relevant provision of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and credit of tax paid on imported services should be allowed if they are in the nature of input services. Further in this case the tax was paid under Section 66 of the Finance Act, and hence the credit is admissible in the appellant. Further as per the department impugned order though the tax itself was not required to be paid then in that case credit is nothing but a refund of the tax erroneously paid by the appellant in their Cenvat Credit account. Further, in the case of Bajaj A....