TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (2) TMI 801
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ourse of audit several issues on irregular availment of cenvat credit were raised and the Commissioner after detailed verification denied cenvat credit on various accounts and confirmed the demands in certain cases and imposed penalty in terms of provisions of Rule 15(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. He also imposed penalty under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 for not obtaining registration as required under Section 69 of the Finance Act. Aggrieved by the above order the appellant is in appeal before us. 3. The Learned Counsel with regard to denial of cenvat credit on the ground that the invoices were issued from an unregistered premises, stated that the appellant carries out centralized billing for all the premises in Bangalore, hence all the branches/premises need to be considered as part of such Centralized Premises for the purpose of service tax liability. It is submitted that documentary evidence such as lease agreements, invoice copies for output services were issued from the unregistered premises on which service tax has been discharged hence cenvat credit cannot be denied only for non-registration of that premises. Relie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lore. It is also stated that these goods were subjected to excise duty but exempted vide Notification No. 50/2003CE dated 10.06.2003. Similarly with regard to sale of training kits it is submitted that they are liable to tax under VAT/CST and hence the question of payment of service tax does not arise. Relied on the decision in the case of Imagic Creative Private Ltd. Versus Commercial of Commercial Taxes 2008 (1) TMI 2 (Supreme Court). 3.3 With regard to denial of exemption to goods supplied to SEZ units, it is submitted that during the relevant period Notification 04/2004ST dated 31.03.2004 was the relevant notification based on which all the supplies made to SEZ units were exempted from service tax, hence the order on this issue cannot be sustained. 3.4 Coming to the participation fee for SAP TechEd Event it is submitted that the appellant in order to update and showcase to their customers/ stakeholders or individual participants with the technological news and changes on latest SAP technologies conduct these events and providing such information does not qualify as commercial training and coaching activity, hence not liable to service tax. With regard to sponsorship servi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., MUMBAI. Also, the revenue relies on the decision in the case of Genovate India limited versus CCE 2019 (5) TMI 914. 4.3 With regard to limitation, it is submitted that the entire scheme of self-assessment relies on fair compliance of the appellant and they being a large organization, need to be aware of the specific laws and comply with the same. Having not complied with the relevant laws and the Cenvat Credit Rules the Commissioner was right in invoking suppression and imposing penalty for violation of the same. 5. Heard both sides. The issues to be decided are: A. Whether the appellant is eligible for cenvat credit on the invoices issued from a premises which is not registered under their Centralized Registration Certificate. The appellant had registered 8 premises under the Centralized Registration provisions but the following 6 premises did not figure in their Centralized Registration. Sl.No. Address of Premises which do not find mention in the Service Tax Registration 1. No. 5 Prestige Ridge, Domlur Service Road, Bangalore 2. A-Installation, Sewree Fort Road, Sewree (East), Mumbai 3. Global Delivery Centre, 32, 3rd Floor, ACR Towers, Resid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nding cenvat credit for these premises does not arise, hence rightly denied. B. Eligibility of cenvat credit on services namely, Architect service, Authorized Service Station Service, Event Management Service etc., The Commissioner has denied cenvat credit on the above services only on the ground that there is no nexus between the input service and the output service rendered by the appellant. On the other hand, the appellant has submitted that the architecture service is used for modernisation/renovation of their premises, cleaning services are used for maintaining a clean environment, club and association services are related to national or internation market trade associations which helps them to update with the latest developments in business. The convention services are also used for day-to-day business operations/meetings. Similarly, design services, event management services, etc., are all services in relation to the activities undertaken by the appellant. Since, individual invoices have not been verified to examine whether these were in relation to the operations rendered by the appellant, we remand the matter to the Commissioner only to examine whether these services we....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bsence of entire set of documents, the services cannot be concluded as exempted'. The appellant claims that this software was subject to VAT/CST and the recipient issues Form-C and based on the agreements the appellant carries out the replication of the software in a CD/DVD the same needs to be considered as exempted service. Since the agreements were not placed before the Commissioner to prove that they are exempted services, and the Commissioner observes that 'the assessee failed to produce the entire documents during the audit in spite of several opportunities provided to them and always argued that they have claimed exemption in the ST-3 returns filed by them as the same is liable for VAT and not taxable under the Finance Act, 1994'. In view of the above, the matter is remanded to the Commissioner for further examination based on the documents placed on record by the appellant to prove that VAT has been discharged on the above software. The decision by the Supreme Court in the case of Tata Consultancy Services Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh 2004 (178) ELT 22 (S.C.) and the decision in the case of Yokogawa India Ltd. Vs. CCE and ST, Bangalore 2023 (12) TMI 175 CESTAT Bangalore shou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (iii) the developer or unit of a Special Economic Zone shall maintain proper account of receipt and utilisation of the said taxable services. Explanation. - For the purposes of this notification, - (1) "Board of Approvals" means the combined Board of Approvals for export oriented unit and Special Economic Zone units, as notified in the Official Gazette, from time to time by the Government of India in the Ministry of Commerce and Industry; (2) "developer" means a person engaged in development or operation or maintenance of Special Economic Zone, and also includes any person authorised for such purpose by any such developer; (3) "Special Economic Zone" means a zone specified as Special Economic Zone by the Central Government in the notification issued under clause (iii) of Explanation 2 to the proviso to sub- section (1) of section 3 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944). From the records, it is seen that the period of dispute is from October 2008 to March 2009 and as rightly stated by the appellant they are eligible for the benefit of the exemption for the services rendered to the SEZ unit as per the Notification No. 4/2004 dated 31.03....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ne year from the relevant date. In the instant case the grievance of the Revenue is that the assessee has wrongly availed the Cenvat credit. The relevant date in those circumstances would be, when the assessee wrongly utilized or used the Cenvat credit. Within one year from that date, proceedings have to be initiated for recovery if in the opinion of the Revenue it is wrongly utilized or used. They cannot invoke 5 years period which gets attracted only in cases of fraud, collusion, wilful statement or suppression of facts or contravention of any of the provisions of the Act. The Tribunal has categorically held that the departmental authorities are fully aware of the activities undertaken by the assessee during the material period. It had periodically filed returns relating to receipt of inputs and availment of Cenvat credit. It had also filed periodical returns showing payment of excise duty on its final products. Authorities never raised objection to the assessee taking and utilizing Cenvat credit during the material period for payment of duty on its final products as reflected in the monthly ER-1 returns. Therefore, the impugned demand invoking larger period under Rule 14 of the ....