TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 90
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ellant from 'Tata Sky Ltd' to 'Tata Play Limited' consequent to issue of certificate of incorporation pursuant to change of name by Registrar of Companies. 2. Miscellaneous Application is allowed. Registry is directed to make necessary changes in the cause title by change of name of appellant to 'Tata Play Limited'. 3. The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein service tax has been demanded from the appellant for the period April 2008 to March 2013. 4. The facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in providing D2H broadcasting services through a set-top box and dish installed at the customers' premises (CPE). Business model of the appellant is that when customer, who is referred as subscriber, approache....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... b) Certain CPE were lost/ damaged at the warehouse itself prior to being put to use. Therefore, credit claimed on such CPE should be reversed since the inputs shall be deemed to be removed. c) in certain cases, the CPE already supplied to the subscriber and used for providing the service were found defective and returned back to the warehouse for repairing if possible or discarding the same if the repair was not possible. The credit claimed on such lost/discarded equipment also should be reversed. 6. Accordingly, demand has been proposed as under: Particulars Amount CPE lying at customer location in case of deactivated/cancelled connections Rs.14,11,13,980 CPE lost/ damaged at the applicant's warehous....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....scriber and returned due to defect, in that circumstances provisions of Rule 3(5) CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 are not applicable to the facts of the case as the said goods are not removed as such. With regard to certain CPEs lost or damaged at appellant's warehouse prior to it being put to use and returned or sold as scrap, the Learned Counsel for the appellant stated that the said CPEs has been removed 'as such' returned prior to use and sold as scrap, they are liable to pay CENVAT credit in terms of Rule 3(5) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 but contended that extended period of limitation is not invocable in the facts and circumstances of the case as regular audits took place and after no discrepancy was raised against the appellant and in the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be made where any inputs or capital goods are removed outside the premises of the provider of output service for providing the output service:' 14. On going through the said provisions, we find that the input on which CENVAT credit has been taken removed 'as such' then the assessee is required to reverse the CENVAT credit. Admittedly, the CPE lying at customer's locations and CPEs returned as scrap at appellant's warehouse due to some defect after use at subscriber's location are used by the appellant and, therefore, they are not removed 'as such'. In that circumstances Rule 3(5) CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 are not applicable to the facts of the case. Therefore, demand raised on that count of Rs. 14,11,13,980/- are not sustainable and are....