Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2024 (12) TMI 287

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Renting of Immovable Property Service, etc. They are also providing the exempted services and had availed the option under sub-clause (ii) of sub rule 3 of Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. During the audit of their records, department observed that the appellant has Cenvat credit of Rs. 1,11,22,936/- during the Financial Year 2010-11 and of Rs. 1,42,31,299/- during 2012-13. The Cenvat credit on the said amounts have been worked out at Rs. 28,42,027/- and Rs. 32,22,660/- for the respective financial year. However, department has worked out the same at Rs. 97,67,158/- and Rs. 36,32,862/- (Rs.20,17,121 + Rs.16,15,741/-) respectively. Based on these observations, it is alleged that the appellant has short paid an amount equivalent to Ce....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....en on Management Consultancy Service it was not liable for proportionate reversal. Total Cenvat credit availed in the Year 2010-11 is Rs. 1,11,22,936/- out of which substantial amount of Rs. 78,86,394/- pertains to Management Consultancy Services. Hence, the substantial demand on this account is liable to be set aside. 3.1 With respect to the alleged short payment of Rs. 3,87,671/- for the period from April 2012 to June 2012, it is submitted that the figures taken by the department for calculating the said shortcoming do not tally with the figures reflected in the appellant's record. Learned Chartered Accountant further mentioned that during this period, an amount of Rs. 4,46,651/- has been included in the credit availed of Rs. 15,77,123....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (iii) The appellant is not maintaining the separate register for the inputs used in providing taxable as well as exempted services like Food Sale in Restaurants, Boarding and Lodging facilities of guests etc. (iv) Sub-clause (ii) of Rule 6 (3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 has been complied with by the appellant. (v) While applying Rule 6 (3A) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 appellant had reversed the proportionate Cenvat Credit of Rs. 28,42,027/- for the Year 2010-11 with an intimation thereof to the department vide letter dated 30.06.2011 and has also reversed the proportionate Cenvat credit of Rs. 28,32,413/- for the Year 2011-12 under intimation to the department vide letter dated 29.06.2012. 6. We also observe that th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y Service defined under Section 65 (105) (r) of Finance Act, 1994. According to the said provision 100% credit on the Management Consultancy Service is specifically allowed even if it is partially used in providing the exempted services. The rule clarifies that the credit taken on Management Consultancy Service is not liable for proportionate reversal under Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. We accordingly hold that the amount of Cenvat credit was not supposed to be reversed vis-à-vis Management Consultancy Services. The original adjudicating authority also in Para 4.4.1 in sub-para 2 has held that appellant to be entitled to avail 100% credit of the same irrespective of their utilization in taxable or non-taxable service during th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... above observed admitted facts, the appellant was providing taxable as well as exempted services and was not maintaining the separate register of the proportionate inputs used for both kind of services. The said argument of the appellant is not sustainable. The adjudicating authority in Para 4.6 of the order under challenge has held that use of Wi-fi Service by its very nature is not restricted to providing only taxable services. The use of Wi-fi Services in providing number of exempted services has not been denied by the assessee. Rather the assessee themselves had exercised the option under Rule 6 (3)(ii) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 for payment of proportionate amount attributable to exempted services as they were not in a position to id....