TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 1132
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (CCR) read with Section 73(1). The Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 17.10.2015 along with corrigendum to the SCN dated 01.11.2016, was adjudicated by the Adjudicating Authority, whereby, demand of duty on Broadcasting Service and on sale of Film Right Service (FRS) was confirmed in addition demand of Rs. 1,40,14,440/- of irregularly availed and utilised credit vide order dated 30.12.2016 (impugned order). The appellants are in appeal against the said order of the Adjudicating Authority. 2. The Learned Advocate for the appellant submits that in so far as the demand of Service Tax under the category of Broadcasting Service is concerned, they are not contesting the same on merit. However, since the entire confirmed amount was paid during the investigation itself and before issuance of SCN by way of payment of Rs. 1,60,25,255/- in cash and Rs. 1,34,09,390/- by way of utilisation of Cenvat Credit, therefore, they are only contesting the imposition of equivalent penalty under Section 78 of Finance Act 1994 on the grounds that the non-payment of Service Tax was due to severe financial crisis faced by the company during the material period. Therefore, there was no malafide intent to evade....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is main submission is that there was no statutory record prescribed under CCR for the purpose of availing credit and therefore private records i.e. financial records maintained in normal course of the business has to be considered for availment of credit. Further, as there was no specific time limit prescribed for availing credit during the period 2010-11, 2012-13, and the the relevant provision under Rule 4(1) and 4(7) were amended vide Notification No. 21/2014 - CE dated 11.07.2014 only, wherein, the time limit of 6 months was introduced, which got further extended to one year with effect from 01.03.2015. He is relying on the judgement in the case of Voss Exotech Automotive Pvt Ltd., Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-I [2018 (363) ELT 1141 (Tri-Mumbai)] and Indian Potash Ltd., Vs Commissioner of CGST, Meerut [2019 (369) ELT 742 (Tri-All)] in support that such restriction would apply to invoices issued prior to introduction of such restriction. 5. The Learned AR, on the other hand, apart from reiterating the findings of the Commissioner has relied on the judgment in the case of M/s AGS Entertainment Pvt Ltd., & Others Vs Union of India & Others [2013 (7) TMI 23 - Madras H....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re we do not find any infirmity in imposition of penalty under Section 78 in so far as the demand on this count is concerned. Now, coming to their submissions that their case may be considered in terms of Section 80 of Finance Act, we find that the provision as is existed during the material time would be invokable, if there was any reasonable cause for non-payment of Service Tax. However, as discussed, we find that there was no reasonable cause for non-payment and a financial distress, which is also not duly substantiated, cannot be a reasonable cause for non-payment of duty, as and when due. We find that in the facts of the case, the benefit of Section 80 cannot be extended and therefore we uphold the decision of the Adjudicating Authority of not extending the benefit of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. 8. In so far as the issue of Service Tax payable on sale of Film Right under the category of Copy Right Service under Section 65(105)(zzzzt) is concerned, we find that the fact of the case is that the appellant had acquired world satellite right and television broadcast and all other rights connected therewith, including free TV rights, self-destructive disc, MMDS, Air born....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....udicating Authority for deciding the issue based on evaluation of contracts. Therefore, whether it is a case of sale of good or whether it is a case of service has to be understood in terms of contract/agreement etc. 9. Reliance has been placed by the appellant on the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of Vendhar Movies Vs Jt. Dir, D.G. of GST Intelligence, Chennai [2019 (28) GSTL 545 (Mad)] and Pr. Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Chennai Vs Wunderbar Films Private Ltd., [2024 (3) TMI 17 (Mad)], whereas, Department has relied on AGS Entertainment Pvt Ltd., & others Vs Union of India & Others [2013 (7) TMI 23 (Mad)]. While in the judgment in Vendhar case, Hon'ble High Court, the Learned Single Judge, iteralia, held that expression perpetual transfer has to be considered as not temporary and therefore allowed the Writ Petition by way of remand. However, in Wunderbar Films case, the Division Bench on appeal against this judgment by Revenue and on taking into consideration the earlier judgment of Division Bench in the case of AGS Entertainment Pvt Ltd., Vs Union of India [2013 (32) STR 129 (Mad)], allowed the Writ Petition filed by the Revenue, against the s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....redit from the date of issue of invoice or any document was inserted by way of amendment vide Notification No. 21/2014-CE(NT) dated 11.07.2014. Therefore, Department keeping in view that the taking of such credit were reflected first time only in the ST-3s, which were filed on 30.10.2014, 31.10.2014 and 01.11.2014 etc., it was inadmissible. We find that firstly, in view of the judgements cited, supra, and the said provision will not be applicable for invoices issued prior to 11.07.2014. We find that the wording of the amendment is such that it cannot have retrospective effect and has to be prospective in nature. Admittedly, all the credit has been taken beyond six months or for that matter even for one year but taken on the strength of invoices issued during the period, when there was no such restriction on taking the credit within a specific period. However, we also note that what has been provided that under the law and Cenvat Credit Rules is that it should be a bonafide invoice and should meet other conditions and be eligible for taking credit in relation to their manufacture of goods or provision of output service. We find that this aspect has not been examined and the only asp....