Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court *  Mere cancellation of supplier's registration cannot,by itself,justify denial of ITC or cancellation of the recipient's registration:Bombay High Court *  High Court sets aside GST notice citing factual errors and natural justice violations *  Provisional Bank Attachment under Section. 110 of Customs Act Unsustainable Beyond Statutory period without Extension order: Bombay HC orders to defreeze accounts *  Post Clearance MRP Alteration by Distributor Does not attract Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT *  DGFT Expands scope of 'Screws' classification under RoDTEP Scheme  *  E-way bills surze to all time high of 140.6 million in March *  GST Exemption Allowed on Pure Labour Services for Standalone Houses: AAR  *  GST Payable Only on Margin in Second-Hand Car Sales, Subject to Strict Conditions and No ITC Claim: AAR *  DGFT rolls out procedure for allocation of calcined coke *  GST portal update : Pre-deposit amount now editable in Appeals *  J&K HC declared TMT scrap a 'Specified Good' eligibile for GST refunds under Support Scheme  *  Pigmy agents are employees of banks; no GST can be levied on commission  paid to them : Karnataka HC *  DGFT Revises HS Code Description for Screws Under RoDTEP *  GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Without Proper Service of Notice: Allahabad High Court. *  Bengaluru CGST | GST Backlog Appeals Deadline Fixed at June 30, 2026 *  No Time Bar on Refund of Service Tax for Services Not Rendered: CESTAT  Remands Indiabulls Case for Unjust Enrichment Check. *  Supreme Court Holds Renewable Energy Incentive Must Benefit Generators, Not Be Adjusted in Tariff
Subject News *   Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REMANDS GST SHORTFALL MATTER DUE TO ABSENCE OF PERSONAL HEARING   *  CESTAT cancels confiscation and penalties on imported computer cabinet cases: Custom duty restricted to 111 surplus units *  Deposit of tax during search or investigation cannot be treated as 'Voluntary Payment' : Bombay High Court *  Section 76 of the CGST cannot be invoked where the tax has already been duly deposited, even if through another registration of the same entity: Madras High Court *  Sec 74 allows use of material regardless of source; illegality or flaws in section 67 search do not vitiate valid adjudication: HC *  Inter-State transfer of ITC on Amalgamation permissible as given under section 18(3) read with rule 41 of the CGST rules, 2017: Gujarat High Court *  HC: No GST on commisson paid to Pigmy Agents *  IGST refund denial on illegible bill of lading invalid absent chance to furnish docs; merit reconsideration in appeals directed: HC *  ITC is not admissible on GST paid on leasehold rights of land used fpr setting up an air seperation plant: AAAR,Tamil Nadu *  GST: No penalty under Section 74 after voluntary ITC reversal due to non-existent supplier : High Court *  TN AAAR denies GST ITC on Land Lease under Sec. 17(5)(d) for setting up plant and machinery *  GST proceedings quashed as notices sent to old address, despite updated address in registration *  Importer Can’t Be Penalised for Alleged IGCR Procedural Lapses Without Evidence of Departmental Error: CESTAT *  Structured Healthcare Training Not ‘Charitable Activity’, 18% GST Payable: AAR  *  CESTAT As The Appellate Authority For Central Sales Tax Disputes: A Paradigm Shift Under Finance Act, 2023 *   Rs. 25K Cost Imposed On SGST Joint Commissioner for Attaching Bank  Accounts Without Forming Mandatory “Opinion”: Bombay HC *   Ex-Parte GST Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Karnataka  High Court Quashes Adjudication and Bank Attachment.  *   Retrospective GST Cancellation Can’t Invalidate Genuine Transactions:  Jaipur Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Rs. 95,670 ITC Demand. *   GST Pre-Deposit Non-Compliance: Allahabad High Court Allows Appeal  Subject to Rs. 30 Lakh Balance Deposit, Recognises Offline Filing. *  Documentary Nature of Evidence: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Rs. 32.66 Crore Fake ITC Fraud Case *  Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army’s Permanent Commission Process for Women Officers *  Re-Determination of Land Compensation Can Be Based on Appellate Court Awards, Clarifies Scope of S. 28-A: Supreme Court. *  Supreme Court Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Costs On Rent Authority Officer For Acting Beyond Jurisdiction. *  DGGI Meerut | Court Denies Bail to Accused in Claiming Fake ITC And Export Refunds *  Denial of GST Rate Revision Benefit to Contractor Violates Article 14: Rajasthan HC *  GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns: Gauhati High Court Directs Restoration on Compliance. *   Supreme Court Quashes FEMA Adjudication Orders, Revives Proceedings at  Show Cause Stage. *   Higher Rank, Harsher Punishment Justified: Supreme Court Restores Dismissal  of Bank Manager in Misappropriation Case. *   Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation,  Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Law /2016-17/3274

Whether credit be denied on ground that service tax was not required to be paid?

Case:- GHAZIABAD PRECISION PRODUCTS P. LTD. VERSUS C.C.E. & S.T., GHAZIABAD
 
Citation:- 2016 (42) S.T.R. 369 (Tri. - Del.)
 
Brief Facts:-The facts of the case are that the assessee is an exporter of goods and availed certain input services outside India. The assessee was under the impression that as the services have been availed outside India, therefore, the assessee is not required to pay service tax on the services under reverse charge mechanism, did not pay the service tax. During the course of audit, it was pointed out to the assessee that assessee is required to pay service tax on the input services availed outside India under the reverse charge mechanism. The assessee paid service tax as directed by the Audit team and took the credit of the same in PLA. Subsequent audit also took place, wherein it was directed to the assessee that they were not required to pay service tax under reverse charge mechanism, therefore, whatever the service tax they had paid, they are not entitled to credit of same. In these set of facts, the show cause notice was issued to the appellant to deny the credit availed by them which he was adjudicated and proposal made in the show cause notice was confirmed by the adjudicating authority. On appeal, learned Commissioner (Appeals) held that the assessee has to reverse the credit along with interest availed by them but the assessee can file refund claim of the service tax paid by them. In consequence to the said order, the assessee reversed the Cenvat credit and filed refund claim.
 
Appellant’s Contentions:- In the appeal filed, the assessee is requesting for setting aside of demand of interest confirmed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) by reversal of credit during the intervening period.
 
Respondent’s Contentions:-The Revenue has challenged the impugned order on the premise that the assessee is not entitled to take Cenvat credit in their PLA account and refund claim filed by the assessee is barred by limitation.
 
Reasoning Of Judgement-The Tribunal heard both the parties.
In this case, initially the assessee was not paying the Service Tax under reverse charge mechanism and on being pointed out by the Audit team have paid the Service Tax and taken credit in their PLA account. In subsequent audit, it was observed that as the assessee is not required to pay Service Tax, therefore, they are not entitled to avail Cenvat credit. Infact, on the Service Tax paid by the assessee under reverse charge mechanism, the assessee has taken the credit. On being pointed out by the later audit team, the Service Tax they were asked to reverse the credit of service tax taken by them.
As per Rule 3 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, the assessee is entitled to take the credit of Service Tax paid. Therefore, the observation of the audit team in subsequent audit is not correct. If that has been taken care of at that time, this allegation was not required. Further, the observations made by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order directing the assessee to reverse the said credit and file refund claim is also not warranted. As the entire exercise is revenue neutral, in these circumstances, the following order was passed :
The service tax paid by the assessee initially as directed by the Audit team under reverse charge mechanism, the assessee is entitled to take Cenvat credit of the same in their Cenvat credit account. There is no requirement of reversal of Cenvat credit and consequently, the assessee is not required to file Refund claim.
With these observations, appeals are disposed of.
 
Decision- Appeal disposed of.
 
Comment-The gist of the case is thatassessee having paid Service Tax under reverse charge mechanism,  is  entitled to avail credit of same in Cenvat credit account .Therefore, merely because service tax was erroneously paid cannot be the reason for denying credit as far as service tax has been paid by assessee.
 
Prepared By- Praniti Lalwani
 
 

Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com