Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2026 (7) TMI 1359

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssue with respect to the claim of admissibility of CENVAT Credit. 2. Heard both the sides and perused the case records. 3. The submission of the learned Counsel for the appellate is that once tax has been paid on input services, the benefit of credit must be allowed as it would lead to double taxation. The submission is that the service tax demand has already been discharged by the appellant by adjusting the input tax credit/CENVAT Credit to the tune of Rs.6,84,872/- against service tax liability on total turnover of Rs.45,65,813/- during the financial year 2016-17, however, the same has inadvertently not been reported in the ST-3 Returns. He, therefore, submitted that this is just a procedural lapse for which the substantive right of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... decisions of this Tribunal on the provisions of Rule 4 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 as follows:- (1) Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-II Vs.FIAT India Pvt. Ltd. -2009 (2) TMI 186 -CESTAT-Mumbai   (2) Sumangal Glass Industries Pvt.Ltd. Vs. CCE & ST, Rajkot-2019(12) TMI 939-CESTAT-Ahmedabad   (3) M/s.Indo Shell Mould Ltd.Vs. CCE, Coimbatore-2016 (4) TMI 369 -CESTAT-Chennai   (4) Progressive Systems Vs. CCE, Bangalore - 2009 (8) TMI 591 -CESTAT-Bangalore   (5) CCE, Bangalore-II Vs. Progressive Systems - 2011 (2) TMI 477-Karnataka High Court   (6) Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur Vs. Raghuvur (India) Pvt. Ltd. - 2000 (5) TMI 40 (SC) 6. I would also like ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....le. The Tribunal in the said case observed that hyper technicalities should not be made to disallow Cenvat credit. Similarly, in the context of availing credit on Debit Note cum Bill, the Tribunal in Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Gwalior Chemicals-(2011)274 ELT 97 (CESTAT-SMB), held that Cenvat credit can be taken on basis of document title 'Debit Note cum Bill'. The Tribunal noted that the words used in rule 4A(1) of Service Tax Rules are 'invoice, challan or Bill'. Rule 11 of Central Excise Rules specified the document as 'Invoice'. This indicated that in case of Service Tax, specific nomenclature was not essential. In fact, the Tribunal noted that first and second proviso to rule 4A(1) uses the term "any document, by whateve....