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/2013-14/1722

Whether credit in respect of services used for generation of electricity for captive use admissible?

Case:-JSWSTEEL LTD Vs COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, THANE-II
 
Citation:-  2013-TIOL-1146-CESTAT-MUM
 
Brief facts:-Material facts of this case are that Revenue denied credit in respect of Service Tax paid on Input services which are used in or in relation to the generation of electricity in a captive power plant on the ground that definition of Inputs & Input Services are different and there is no provision in the definition of “Input Service” for allowing credit in respect of services used for generation of electricity for captive use. Appellant submitted that the power generated in the captive power plant is partly used in manufacture of dutiable final products and partly sold to Maharashtra State Electricity Development Corporation and they had taken proportionate credit in respect of input services which had gone into generation of electricity which is used in manufacture of final product and in case of taxable services covered under rule 6(5) of CCR, they availed full credit. Revenue also contended that applicants had not opted to follow the provisions of Rule 6 and not informed regarding taking of proportionate credit. The applicant filed this application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 1,69,77,363/-, interest and penalty. The demand is confirmed after denying the credit in respect of the service tax paid on input services which are used in or in relation to the generation of electricity in a captive power plant.
 
Appellant’s contention:- The contention of the applicant is that the applicants were having the captive power plant and the power generated in the active power plant is partly used in the manufacture of final product which is cleared on payment of duty and partly the electricity was sold to Maharashtra State Electricity Development Corporation. The applicants were availing proportionate credit in respect of the input services which have gone into generation of electricity which is used in  the manufacture of final product. In case of taxable services which are covered under Rule 6(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, the applicant’s availed full credit of service tax paid. The applicants relied upon annexures B and C to the show cause notice where it is admitted that the applicants were taking proportionate credit in respect of the input services which have gone into the generation of electricity used in the manufacture of goods. The contention is that the adjudicating authority denied the credit on the ground that the definition of input and input services are different and inputs used in or in relation to generation of electricity whereas no such provision is under the definition of input service. The input service also includes any service used by the manufacturer whether directly or indirectly in relation to the manufacture of final product. The input services which are used in the generation of electricity are directly and indirectly used in the manufacture of final product which is cleared on payment of duty, therefore the interpretation given by the learned Commissioner in the impugned order is contrary to the provisions of the Cenvat Credit Rules.

Respondent’s contention:-The Revenue submitted that the applicants had not opted as per the provisions of Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules for availing proportionate credit and had not informed the Revenue regarding taking of proportionate credit. The Revenue also submitted that the applicants never disclosed to the Revenue that part electricity so generated is sold to Maharashtra State Electricity Development Corporation hence the demand is rightly made.
 
Reasoning of judgement:- The bench found that the adjudicating authority denied the credit in respect of service tax paid on the taxable services which are used in or in relation to generation of electricity. Part of such electricity was sold outside the factory. The applicants are availing proportionate credit in respect of the service tax paid on the taxable services which are used in or in relation to manufacture of goods. The arguments raised by the Revenue during the hearing of the stay application were not the basis for denying the credit in the impugned order. As the applicants were availing only proportionate credit in respect of the taxable services which were used in or in relation to generation of electricity which is, further used in the manufacture of excisable goods hence the applicants made out a case for waiver of pre-deposit of the dues. Therefore, the pre-deposit of the dues is waived and recovery of the same is stayed during the pendency of the appeal.
 
Decision:-The stay petition was allowed.
 
Comment:-The analogy drawn from this case is that prima facie the manufacturer is eligible for claiming the service tax credit in respect of services that are used in the generation of electricity that is captively consumed in the manufacture of the final dutiable products.
 

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