TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1883
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le Cenvat Credit along with interest and penalty and has also confirmed the demand of Rs.64,534/- raised on account of short payment of service tax along with interest and penalty, by invoking the extended period of limitation. 2. Briefly stated facts of the present case are that the Appellant was a multi system operator which was receiving signals from the broadcasters and transmitting signals to local cable operators who were transmitting signals to ultimate customers. The Appellant was registered with the Service Tax department and was paying service tax on their output service and was availing Cenvat Credit on input services in terms of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. 2.1 Records of the Appellant were audited between August to Octo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the Act. 2.2 The Appellant filed detailed reply to the show cause notice citing various provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules as well as decisions of various benches of the Tribunal to prove that they have rightly availed the Cenvat Credit. 2.3 After following the due process, the learned Commissioner, vide the impugned order, dropped the demand of Rs.2,82,04,965/- raised on account of inadmissible Cenvat Credit but confirmed the demand of Rs.8,28,713/-/- on account of inadmissible Cenvat Credit along with interest and penalty; further, the learned Commissioner also confirmed the demand of Rs.64,534/- on account of short payment of service tax along with interest and penalty, by invoking extended period of limitation. Hence, the prese....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of account which was verified by the audit team during the audit. He further submits that the Appellant has taken Cenvat Credit within time on the basis of valid invoices in terms of Rule 9(1) of the Rules, therefore, the denial of credit is not sustainable. 4.5 He further submits that the Appellant has duly discharged burden of proof and non-making of payment to service provider would not amount to non-discharge of burden. 4.6 As regards the short payment of service tax amounting to Rs.64,534/-, the learned Counsel submits that same could not be deposited in time due to non-preparation of audited balance sheet and the appellant had already furnished revised ST-3 returns for the relevant period and as per revised returns, there was no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing the submissions of the Appellant, the learned Commissioner dropped the demand of Rs.2,82,04,965/- and confirmed the demand of only Rs.8,28,713/- but the ground on which the learned Commissioner has confirmed the demand, is beyond the show cause notice. Further, I find that the ground of rejection of Cenvat Credit in show cause notice has been dropped by the learned Commissioner but he has confirmed the remaining demand on the ground that the Appellant has failed to pay to service provider, which of course has been denied by the Appellant, but this cannot be a ground to reject the Cenvat Credit when the same does not appear in the show cause notice. Further, I find that there is no dispute with regard to rendition of service and availmen....