TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 1670
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Service Tax is discharged by the respective circles based on the services provided respectively by each of them. 2. The appellant is providing telecommunication services for Chennai Region alone. A Special Audit of the accounts of the appellant was conducted for the period from April 2010 to March 2015 as stipulated under Section 14AA of the Central Excise Act, 1944 as made applicable to Service Tax in terms of Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1944 read with Section 72A of the Finance Act, 1944. 3. During the course of verification of documents by the audit team it appeared that there was short payment of service tax as well as wrongful availment of cenvat credit. The issues noted by the audit team are as follows : • Non-payment of Service Tax on the consideration received for out-roamer from other entities. • Non-reversal of Cenvat credit on Business Support Services reimbursed. • Irregular availment of Cenvat credit on Capital goods; • Irregular availment of input service credit on collection charges. • Non reversal of Cenvat on capital goods destroyed by fire. • Non-payment of se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to as "Other Vodafone entities." 4.5 As per TRAI mandate, each telecom service provider can render telecommunication services only on a non-mutual basis within their licensed service area. To use an illustration, the Appellant could render telecommunication services only within Chennai. Another entity, Vodafone West Limited (a Vodafone entity set up in Gujarat) could render telecommunication services only within Gujarat. 4.6 The Appellant operates out of 6 circles in Tamil Nadu. The Chennai circle renders telecommunication services only within Chennai. While separate service tax registrations have been obtained by each of the 6 Circles, all the 6 circles operate under a single PAN. 4.7 A subscriber of appellant can continue using the network of other Vodafone entities and other circles of the Appellant even when the subscribers are roaming, i.e., when they are travelling to locations that are outside the Appellant's circle. The roaming subscribers could recharge their telephone balance(s) using prepaid roaming Electronic top-ups ("E-Top ups") available at distributors and retailers across the country. The issue is only with pre-paid subscribers. 4.8 As service....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etwork Equipment ('NGN Equipment) port charges, lease line charges, port SDH Transmission charges, premises rent, MIG Annual maintenance etc. Some of these input services were used across the other circles of the Appellant. The Appellant would recover the expenses incurred towards procurement of these input services from the other circles under debit notes. The Department has demanded reversal of CENVAT Credit availed of service tax paid on the sole basis that the said input services were used not just by the Appellant, but also by other circles. 5.2 The Appellant had initially availed CENVAT Credit of duty paid on HDPE Ducts classifiable under CH 39 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, by treating them as capital goods. Upon realising the inadvertent error, the Appellant classified the HDPE Ducts as inputs and claimed credit of the duty paid. This CENVAT Credit was denied on the ground that the HDPE Ducts do not fall within the definition of 'capital goods' in Rule 2(a) of the CCR or as inputs under Rule 2(k) of the CCR. 5.3 The impugned Order in paragraph 39 has acknowledged that the Appellant has reversed CENVAT credit of Rs.1,12,359/- along with interest of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....not 'inputs' 01.12.2010- 31.01.2014 39, 42.01 2,24,718/- TOTAL (Rs.) 32,60,09,625/- 5.6 The Impugned Order has dropped a demand of INR 18,00,688/-in paragraph 42.2. As on date, no revenue appeal has been preferred against the impugned order to this extent of dropping the demand. 5.7 Pursuant to Special Audit conducted under Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 ("Act") for the period from April 2010 to March 2015, the Show Cause Notice No. 51/2015 dated 16.10.2015 ("SCN") was issued proposing to demand service tax allegedly short paid and to recover Cenvat credit allegedly wrongly availed along with interest and penalty. A. The Appellant is not liable to pay service tax on the roaming revenue transferred from other Vodafone entities. [INR 28,20,45,999/-]. A1. It has been alleged in the impugned Order that the Appellant has not paid service tax on consideration received from other Vodafone entities or other circles of the Appellant for providing services to the subscribers. The Appellant submits that the impugned Order has assumed that the amount received from other Vodafone entities operating in other circles is cons....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r circle of the Appellant is no substitute to the Appellant's liability to discharge service tax; which finding may be rejected. A8. In Chotey Lal Radhey Shyam vs, CCE Lucknow - 2016 (44) S.T.R. 266 (Tri. - AlL) the Tribunal held in paragraph 6 that once the Telecom company (BSNL in that case) had discharged Service Tax on the full value of the SIM cards at the time of sale to its retailers / distributors, no service tax could be demanded from the Assessee therein on the SIM Cards sold by the retailer to the ultimate subscriber. Applying the logic to the instant case, it is submitted that when the other Vodafone entity/circle of the Appellant has remitted applicable service tax, the Appellant cannot be made liable to pay service tax again. The decision of the Tribunal was affirmed by the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in CCE Vs Chotey Lal Radhey Shyam - 2018 (8) G.S.T.L. 225 (All.) A Revenue Appeal filed against the said judgment is pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court in Commissioner vs, Chotey Lal Radhey Shyam - 2018 (13) G.S.T.L J4I (SC). The decision of the Hon'ble High Court is not stayed as on date. A9. Further reliance is placed on Kakinad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at the input service must be utilised for providing output service, whereas the Impugned Order has introduced a new condition. B5. It is submitted that the cost of the service has been borne by the Appellant and hence credit towards such service should be available to the assessee. It is further submitted that no provisions under the Credit Rules stipulates the reversal of Cenvat credit in a scenario where input services are received by one unit of an entity for providing services to other units of same entity. Therefore. the entire demand is misconceived. B6. Reliance is placed on paragraph 10 of the decision in Greaves Cotton Ltd. vs. CCE, Chennai - 2015 (37) S.T.R. 395 (Tri. - Chennai) for the proposition that credit cannot be denied merely because the Service Tax on advertisement charges was paid by Unit-I for the advertisement of product of Unit-II, while both are under the umbrella of the same company. B7. Without prejudice, it is submitted that the Appellant would have been able to obtain registration as an Input Service Distributor (ISD') for such situations. It is now settled that procedural infractions should not obstruct substantive rights available to an As....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rcise is academic with no revenue implication, the proceedings merit to be dropped. Reliance in this regard is placed on CCE v. Indeos ABS Lud. (2010 (254) E.L.T. 628 (Guj)) and CCE v. Narayan Polyplast |2005] 2005 taxmann.com 450 (SC) D. The availment of CENVAT credit of service tax paid on collection charges is valid. [INR 81,43,950/-] D1. The impugned Order has disallowed CENVAT Credit availed on service tax on collection charges paid to collection agents by the Appellant on the reasoning that the definition of input service in Rule 2(ℓ) of the CCR has been restricted w.e.f. 01.04.2011 and that the services provided by the vendors have no nexus with telecommunication services provided by the Appellant. D2. The Appellant submits that the services rendered by the collection agents are essential to the telecommunication service provided by the Appellant. The services provided by the collection agents are two-fold- • With respect to collecting the bills from the subscribers who are unable to pay their dues through the normal mechanism of cheque/cash at Vodafone stores. online payment, etc. • With respect to collecting the defaulti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ding Output Services except those which are specifically excluded in Rule 2(k). The Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that the test of functional utility should be satisfied for any goods to qualify as 'inputs' under Rule 2(k) and that the definition is wide enough to bring all goods which are used for providing an output service. The Revenue has challenged the Order of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court before the Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 17536 of 2019. The Hon'ble Apex Court has issued notice in the Revenue Appeal. However, the Order of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court has not been stayed. Though credit of duty paid on the HDPE ducts was inadvertently taken under 'Capital goods' credit is available as inputs' E4. The Appellant had inadvertently availed CENVAT Credit of duty paid on the HDPE ducts under the `capital goods' category. There is no dispute that applicable duty was remitted on the HDPE Ducts and that the HDPE Ducts are used in the rendition of telecommunication services. The only dispute is as to whether the duty paid is eligible for credit. E5. The Appellant submits that the duty paid on the HDPE D....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd hence extended period of limitation cannot be invoked. Relance is placed on International Merchandising Company, LLC Vs. CST - 2022 (67) G.S. T.L. 129 (S.C.). G3. The SCN was issued on 16.10.2015 for the period from 01.04.2010 to 31.03.2015. The demand for the period from 01.04.2010 to 30.09.2013 is barred by limitation. G4. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in UOI vs Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills- 2009 (238) E.L. T. 3 (S.C) for the proposition that the conditions for invoking extended period of limitation are similar to the conditions for imposing equal penalty. Thus, if it is demonstrated that extended period of limitation cannot be invoked, then it follows that equal penalty ought not to be imposed. G5. Without prejudice, it is submitted that this is a fit case for extending the benefit under Section 80 of the Act, which was operative for the entire period under dispute. H. There can be no interest liability fastened on the Appellant as the demand itself falls. H1. The Appellant submits that interest is not payable because the demand fails. The Appellant submits that there is no short payment of service tax, and t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oamer service outside the jurisdiction of the circle of the appellant but within the jurisdiction of the other circles of the same company i.e. Vodafone South Limited. It is explained by the Ld. Counsel for the department that when the subscriber recharges from a different circle other than the home circle within the VSL, the revenue generated at the other circle is passed on to the home circle as out roamer revenue. This revenue is ultimately the consideration received by appellant for providing services to their subscribers. 6.3 The main contention of the appellant is that the out roamer revenue so transferred to the home circle has been discharged to tax by the out roamer circles and therefore the appellant is not required to pay service tax. Para 33.4 of the impugned order was adverted to by the Ld. Counsel for the department to submit that the appellant has not furnished any document to show that these out roamer circles have discharged service tax on the out roamer revenue that has been transferred to the appellant. Therefore the contention of the appellant cannot be accepted. 6.4 As per Rule 2 (1) (d) (ii) of the Service Tax Rules, 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wever, as per the definition of "assessee" as in Section 65 (7) his agent can discharge service tax on behalf of the assessee after entering into an agreement to that effect. But in the instant case, the other entities and other circles are not agents of the assessee. 6.7 It is mandatory on the part of appellant to come up with documentary evidence to establish payment of service tax by other entities. When the assessee claims that the service tax stands paid by other entities without producing any documentary evidence, the original authority has correctly rejected the contention of the appellant. 6.8 The judgment relied by the appellant in the case of Chotey Lal Radhey Shyam Vs CCE Lucknow (supra) is not applicable to the facts of the case for the reason that the issue involved in that case was the dispute of non-payment of service tax on the profit margin earned by appellant on the sale of SIM cards and recharge coupons of BSNL. The issue is entirely different and not applicable. Further the department has filed appeal before the Hon'ble Apex Court against the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat which is still pending. 6.9 The judgment in th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....used as a protective resistant to chemicals and corrosive soils for eliminating maintenance. The adjudicating authority has rightly denied the credit. 9. The next issue is with regard to irregular availment of input service credit on collection charges. The appellant has wrongly availed credit of service tax paid in respect of services rendered by collection agents. The collection agent service is a post-service activity and has no nexus with providing telecommunication services. For the period after 1.4.2011 the definition of input services has been amended and the expression "activities relating to business" stands omitted. The appellant is therefore eligible to avail credit only when the input services have nexus with the output services provided. In the present case, the collection agent service does not have any nexus with the output service viz. telecommunication service rendered by appellant and hence the original authority has correctly denied the credit. 10. The other issue is with regard to irregular availment of cenvat credit passed on by debit notes raised to group concerns. As per the audit reports, it was noted that the appell....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for Department prayed that the appeal may be dismissed. 12. Heard both sides. 13. The first issue that arises for analysis is the demand of service tax on the out roamer revenue received by the appellant from other entities as well as out roamer revenue received from other circles within VSL. According to the department, the appellant being the service provider is liable to pay service tax on the out roamer revenue transferred to them from other entities as well as other circles. The defence put forward by the appellant is that the service tax on such consideration collected from the subscribers has already been paid to the Government by other entities as well as other circles within VSL. 14. From narration of facts, the consequence of transaction is such that the recharge vouchers / E-top ups are purchased by appellant's subscribers from other entities or from other Circles while they are in roaming circle. While selling the RCV/E-Top ups, the customer pays the charges for receiving the services of the RCV as well as the service tax on such service. According to appellant, the Vodafone entity operating in the roaming circle who has collected the charges along....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....yalty payment for the use of cellular spectrum upto 4.4 MHz + 4.4 MHz and Licence fee for Cellular Mobile handsets & Cellular Mobile Base Stations and also for possession of wireless telegraphy equipment as per the details prescribed by Wireless Planning & Coordination Wing (WPC). Any additional band width, if allotted subject to availability and justification shall attract additional Licence fee as revenue share (typically 1% additional revenue share if Bandwidth allocated is upto 6.2 MHz + 6 2 MHz in place of 44 MHz + 44 MHz). However, while calculating 'AGR' for limited purpose of levying spectrum charges based on revenue share, revenue from wireline subscribers shall not be taken into account. 18.3.2 Further royalty for the use of spectrum for point to point links and other access links shall be separately payable as per the details and prescription of Wireless Planning & Coordination Wing. The fee / royalty for the use of spectrum / possession of wireless telegraphy equipment depends upon various factors such as frequency, hop and link length, area or operation and other related aspects etc. Authorization of frequencies for setting up Microwave links by Licens....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appellant when sells Recharge Vouchers to subscribers of other Vodafone entity and other circles, the appellant collects the charges and services tax from the subscriber. Appellant then pays the service tax to the government even though the service provider is the other Vodafone entity or other circle. The out roamer revenue is then transferred by appellant to the other Vodafone entity / other circles. 15.1 Relevant part of the reply to the audit objections read as under : 2. Service tax not discharged by "Out roamer Revenue" 2.1 During the course of audit, it was observed by your good self that during the period April 2010 to March 2015, the Company has not paid service tax on out roaming revenue recorded in the books. Accordingly, the Company has been directed to pay service tax amounting to Rs. 26,28,88,110/- along with applicable interest. 2.2 In this connection, at the outset it is submitted that there is no short payment of service tax by the Company during the subject period. In this regard, we request you to refer to our submission provided herein below: (i) VSL is engaged in the business of providing GSM mobile telecommun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unication. Such license fee is calculated as a certain percentage of revenue earned through provision of telecommunication service in specified circles which is dependent on the subscriber base of the Vodafone entity operating in such circle. (x) Given that in the instant case the subscriber, recharging the talk time balance, is not registered with the Vodafone entity operating in the roaming circle, value of recharge one by the subscriber is transferred to VSL which is operating in the home circle of the subscriber. Such amount is subsequently recognised as revenue in the books of VSL home circle as and when the balance is utilised by the subscriber for availing telecommunication services. 2.3 On the basis of the above. it is clear that transfer of amount in the instant case is required for identifying amount of revenue earned by a Vodafone entity from a particular telecom circle which is essential for computing license fee and for preparing necessary reports for the management. Such transfer is not against any service provided by VSL to the Vodafone entity operating in the roaming circle. 2.4 Given the above, it is submitted that service tax on the serv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ice tax on the out roamer revenue has already been discharged by the entity who has collected it. The Department does not have a case that while transferring the out roamer revenue, the other Vodafone entity had transferred the service tax also to appellant. The SCN has been issued pursuant to a special audit. The copy of the special audit report dt. 24.04.2015 under Section 14AA of the Central Excise Act, 1944 has been placed before us. Para 1.2 of the report is the findings and observations with regard to service tax on out roamer revenue. At para 1.26, the auditor's view is noted. On the basis of the appellant's reply that the service tax has already been discharged by other entities, it is observed by audit team that the assessee being the service provider has to discharge service tax on out roaming revenue. Even though assessee put forward the contention that service tax stands discharged by the entity / other circle, it is not stated in the audit report that the other entity has not discharged the service tax. The contention that the appellant has discharged service tax on the out roamer revenue of other entities has also been put forward before the audit team. The rele....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. Inter Company entries are booked for the above transactions. c) It is an activity carried out by one person to another. d) In fact, ST is discharged, when the same subscriber recharges his card from the Home Circle, while no ST is charged when the same Subscriber recharges it from Other Circles. 1.2.3.3) Person liable to paying service tax: Relevant Provisions under Service Tax: Rule 2 (1) (d) (ii) of the Service Tax Rules states as under: "person liable for paying service tax", * ....... ii) In a case other than sub-clause (i), means the provider of service. 1.2.3.4 Thus based on the above definition, only the Service Provider is liable for paving Service Tax. It cannot be done by any other person. Payment made by any other person, cannot be a substitute for non-dischargement of tax by the Assessee 1.2.3.5. Since, the assessee being the provider of output service, all Out Roamer transactions are liable Lo Service Tax and the Assessee is liable for payment of Service Tax. 1.2.4) Treatment in Books and in ST3 Return: 1.2.4.1) Books: Al....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ST3 returns. 1.2.6) 0ur View: i) It is an undisputed fact that the Assessee is providing Service to all its subscribers who are its customers, irrespective of the fact that the recharge was done at the Home Circle or Outside. The practice of discharging ST on Home Circle Revenue but not on Outroaming Revenue defies all logic. ii) The Assessee is the Service Provider for all Outroaming Revenue and hence is liable to Service Tax. As per provisions of Rule 2 (1) (d) (ii), the person liable for payment of Service Tax, is only the "Service Provider" who provides such service and not by any other person, and in this case the Assessee being the Service Provider should have discharged the Service Tax on Outroaming Revenue. iii) Further, on all Outroaming services provided by the Assessee to its customers, full Cenvat Credit had been availed by the assessee. After having availed the full Cenvat Credit for providing the Outroaming services to its own subscribers, the assessee ought to have discharged his liability to Service Tax on Outroaming Revenue. iv) Off-Setting ST discharged by some other entity against the Assessee's liability to discha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....this regard. As per the audit report and facts after weighing the balance of probabilities the strong inference that can be drawn is that service tax has already been discharged on the out roamer revenue to the government exchequer. The service tax having been already discharged on the services provided to the subscriber, the department cannot again collect the service tax. 18. In the case of Chotey Lal Radhey Shyam vs, CCE Lucknow (supra), similar issue as to demand of service tax on an assessee when the tax has already been discharged by another came up for consideration. The issue considered by the Tribunal in the said case was whether service tax is payable on the SIM cards sold by distributors. It was observed that since BSNL had already paid the service tax on SIM cards sold, the demand of service tax from the franchisee again would amount to double taxation. The said decision was upheld by the Allahabad High Court as reported in 2018 (8) GSTL 225 (All.). the relevant paragraphs read as under : "3. On 20th April, 2016, appeal was admitted on following substantial questions of law : - (i) Whether the Hon'ble CESTAT has erred in not confir....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....art of the activation charges or not. Inasmuch as the issue before the Hon'ble Supreme Court was entirely different than the issue involved in the present case we are of the view that following said decision by Commissioner (Appeals) in preference to the decision of Tribunal on the same issue as involved in the present case is not proper. We also refer to the latest decision in the case of Martend Food & Dehydrates Pvt. Ltd. vide Final Order Nos. ST/A/684-687/2012-Cus., dated 6-11-2012, wherein after taking note of the entire case law available on the said issue, the Tribunal in a detailed order has held that activity of purchase and sale of SIM card belonging to BSNL where BSNL has discharged the Service Tax on the full value of the SIM cards, does not amount to providing business auxiliary services and confirmation of demand on the distributors for the second time is not called for. By following the said decision, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief to the appellants." 5. Then, again similar controversy came up in Central Excise Appeal No. 21 of 2013, Commissioner Central Excise v. M/s. Daya Shankar Kailash Chandra Mal [2014 (34....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....T.R. 433 (S.C.)] (supra) has been considered by Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi and similar issue has already been considered in aforesaid judgment of this Court, with which we do not find any reason to take a different view. Hence, aforesaid questions are answered against Revenue, following aforesaid judgments. 7. Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. Interim order, if any, shall stand vacated." Though department has filed appeal against the said decision before the Apex Court, there is no stay of operation of the judgement passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court. 19. In the case of Kakinada Seaports Ltd. vs. CCE, S.T. & CUS., Visakhapatnam-II (supra) the contention raised by the appellant therein was that service tax when already discharged by another cannot be again demanded from the assessee. The facts reveal that according to the agreement signed by appellant therein with the Government of Andhra Pradesh (GOAP), the appellants were given permission to build and operate existing berths as well as to develop and operate additional berths etc. The appellant had collected the revenue for the operation services rendered by them and handed over the share of GO....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ansmission charges, annual maintenance etc. The appellant paid service tax on the entire consideration for the services. These services were not only used by the appellant but also used by other circles and these other circles shared the cost as per debit notes raised against them. The department is of the view that the appellant having shared the use of such services with other circles and also received the reimbursement of expenses for such services, the appellant is eligible only for proportionate credit, in respect of such services. The Ld.Counsel for the appellant submitted that the service tax having been paid by appellant on the entire consideration, the Department cannot deny credit to the appellant. It is also argued that, in any case, if the appellant had obtained Input Service Distributor Registration they would be able to pass on the credit to other circles also who were utilizing the services. It is thus argued that the situation would be only a procedural lapse and the credit cannot be denied. 21.1 From the facts, we find that department does not deny that appellant has used the services. So also, it is not denied that appellant has pa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he ducts are not used for providing telecommunication services and are only used as a resistant or protective cover for the optic fiber cables. 22.1 In the case of CCE Vs Modi Rubber Ltd. - 2000 (119) ELT 197 (Tri.-LB) it has been held that the credit cannot be denied if the goods fall under the category of "inputs" even though the assessee has availed it under the category of "capital goods". Though the adjudicating authority referred to these decisions, has denied the credit by observing that the goods neither qualify as "capital goods" nor as "inputs". After examining the facts, we find that since the goods are used as protective cover for optic fiber cables which are indispensable for providing output service of telecommunication service, we are of the considered opinion that the credit availed on such items is eligible. The Demand raised on this count requires to be set aside. Ordered accordingly. 23. The input service tax credit on collection charges has been denied alleging that these are not used for providing output services and that the collection agency services do not have nexus with the output service. The period involved is prior to 1.4.2011 as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as the security. Therefore in connection to the recovery of the loan this vehicle is taken under repossession, therefore this service is clearly covered under the definition of 'Security' which means a thing deposit or pledged as a guarantee of the fulfilment of an undertaking or the repayment of the loan, to be forfeited in case of default. In view of this definition the service of taking repossession of the vehicle from the borrower is a part of security service which is specifically included in the definition of input service. For this reason also the service of repossession provided by the recovery agent to the appellant is an input service. Therefore the appellant is clearly entitled for the Cenvat credit on such input service. However it is observed from the submission of the Ld. Counsel that the amount of recovery charges was recovered by the appellant from the individual borrowers at the time of giving repossession of the vehicle in case the borrower has repaid the amount. In this regard the proceedings related to demand of Service Tax on such part is pending before this Tribunal. Since that is not a subject matter of the proceedings of the present case, the same c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the Department would, therefore, have to be dismissed and is dismissed." 23.2 Without collection of dues from customers, the appellant would not be able to run its business and provide output services. For these reasons, we find that the credit availed on collection agent charges is legal and proper. 24. The appellant has availed credit on various inputs like waste bin, paper rolls, diaries, award shields and ducts etc. under the category of "inputs". The department has denied credit of Rs.5,39,542/- being the input credit availed on these items. The appellant reversed the credit of Rs.1,12,359/- along with applicable interest of Rs.84,641/- which is the credit availed in respect of waste bin, paper rolls, diaries, etc. However, they contested that the input credit availed in respect of ducts is eligible on the ground that these are used to get cover the buried the HDPE conduit which helps to provide protection from corrosion and thus eliminates maintenance. The Ld. Counsel submitted that they are contesting a demand of Rs.2,24,718/- being the amount pertaining to HDPE ducts only. The issue with regard to ducts whether eligible as input credit has a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....om the appellant on which the appellant has availed credit. The vendor M/s.ITL has issued a certificate stating that they have paid the service tax collected from appellant to the government exchequer and that they have not returned the service tax by issuing credit notes. The appellant has furnished a letter issued by M/s.ITL along with appeal paper book. Since the appellant has borne the burden of service tax, we are of the opinion that the appellant has righty availed the credit. The demand raised on this count cannot sustain and requires to be set aside. 27. Ld. Counsel for the appellant argued on the ground of limitation also. It has to be stated that the demand has been raised pursuant to the special audit conducted by the department. The entire figures and details for issuing the show cause notice has been taken from the accounts maintained the appellant. There is no positive act of suppression alleged or established against the appellant. There is no allegation in the SCN that appellant did not cooperate with the department or that department had unearthed some hidden figures or parallel invoices. The appellant has filed periodical statutory returns and also ....