Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Service tax penalty can’t survive when assessee acted on dept.’s own view of non-taxability: Delhi High Court. *  GST section 74 extended limitation questionable when form 26AS mismatch was already known: Karnataka High Court grants interim relief. *  CGST demand prima facie impermissible after state GST settlement under section 128A: Bombay High Court. *  Supreme Court asks GSTAT to sympathetically consider delay as taxpayers pursued remedy before wrong forum. *  Supreme Court stays Tripura High Court ruling protecting genuine buyers from ITC denial over supplier’s GST default. *  Diary entries alone can’t prove clandestine removal of goods: CESTAT quashes excise penalty on steel trader. *  Customs could investigate preferential tariff claims even before sec. 28DA: Delhi High Court. *  Customs dept. relied on fake AI generated case laws: supreme court quashes Rs. 425.28 crore penalty. *  No GST exemption in affiliation and annual registration charges for admission or conduct Of examinations: GSTAT. *  Mere invoices, cheque payments insufficient to establish genuine movement of goods: GSTAT restores Rs. 43.44 lakh ITC demand. *  Consolidated GST show cause notice covering multiple financial years is not without jurisdiction: Delhi High Court. *  Construction of independent houses on separate plots not taxable as ‘Residential Complex’ without common facilities: CESTAT. *  GST penalty exceeding statutory maximum unsustainable; Allahabad High Court quashes ? 50,000/- penalty after taxpayer filed return and paid late fee. *  GST order against standard chartered bank passed without hearing set aside by Bombay High Court. *  Retracted statements can’t be relied upon without cross-examination: CESTAT quashes gold confiscation. *  Burden to prove misclassification lies on customs department: CESTAT. *  CESTAT quashes Rs. 98 lakh excise demand on clearance of used refractory brick scrap. *  Service tax demand on irrigation works quashed: Karnataka High Court rules sale of goods component not taxable as service. *  GSTAT restores tax and penalty for transporting iron scrap without E-way bill citing intent to evade tax. *  Madras High Court stays GST recovery from directors without opportunity to show cause under section 89. *  Madras high court stays GST recovery notice against directors; finds prima facie case on applicability of section 79(1)(c). *  Procedural lapses can’t justify harsh punishment without serious customs breach: CESTAT quashes customs broker licence revocation. *  Service tax payable on land leasing and sports complex charges: CESTAT. *  Settled customs dispute can’t be reopened through Article 226 challenge to interest liability: Delhi High Court. *  Mere facilitation of customs clearance can’t establish knowledge of smuggling: Madras High Court. *  GST registration cancellation stayed: Allahabad High Court questions 99% ITC utilisation cap under rule 86B. *  Composition scheme lapses automatically on crossing Rs. 1.5 crore turnover: GSTAT. *  Gujarat High Court quashes GST cancellation orders after officer relied on non-existent AI-generated case laws. *  Importers liable for customs duty benefits availed through manipulated scrips: Delhi High Court. *  Procedural E-way bill lapse alone can’t justify penalty where genuine transaction and absence of tax evasion are established: GSTAT.
Subject News *  Documentary evidence dominates probe, further custody unwarranted: mumbai court grants bail in Rs. 22.44 crore customs duty evasion case. *  Business premises can’t remain sealed for non-participation in GST search: Allahabad High Court. *  GST pre-deposit must be refunded proportionately when taxpayer partly succeeds in appeal: Bombay High Court. *  Supreme Court grants 30 days to file GST appeal; keeps pre-deposit issue open due to deposit in parallel CGST proceedings. *  GST demand can’t exceed amount proposed in SCN: Allahabad High Court quashes Rs. 20.47 Crore order. *  Hundreds-of-crores GST demand and heavy 10% pre-deposit no ground to bypass statutory appeal: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Delhi High Court refuses to entertain challenge to gold confiscation due to statutory appeal remedy and unexplained delay. *  Procedural error in customs broker licence inquiry can be rectified through remand: Delhi High Court. *  GSTR-2A mismatch alone can’t justify ITC denial without invoice-wise verification; personal hearing mandatory: GSTAT. *  GST order passed without uploading personal hearing notices violates sec. 75(4): Allahabad High Court. *  TAX EVASION - Sec. 74 GST SCN quashed for not spelling out fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression: Allahabad High Court. *  STPI’s SOFTEX certification and NoC charges taxable as business support services: CESTAT. *  Suspicion can’t replace proof: CESTAT quashes penalty in alleged gold-smuggling operation. *   Limitation runs from communication of order: Madras High Court upholds rejection of delayed GST Appeals. *  Rajasthan High Court quashes GST demand over unsigned show cause notice. *  ITC recovery upheld where supplier failed to deposit GST: Rajasthan High Court. *  Customs commissioner’s empowered to make port trust liable for duty on pilfered goods: Supreme Court. *  Rectification proceedings can’t be used to challenge an uncontested GST assessment through a writ petition: Andhra Pradesh HC. *  GST proceedings against deceased proprietor unsustainable without notice to legal heir: GSTAT. *  Mere availment of ineligible self-assessed ITC doesn’t amount to suppression without evidence of fraud or wilful misstatement: GSTAT. *  Disposal of mining overburden by entity authorised by mining lease holder constitutes taxable service: CESTAT. *  Toll plaza data not mandatory for ITC refund: GSTAT. *  Disputed GST fraud allegations require investigation: Punjab and Haryana High Court makes interim bail absolute in alleged fraud and GST fraud case. *  Non-manufacturer contractor liable to deposit excess excise duty collected from buyer: CESTAT. *  GST order can’t reject taxpayer’s reply as “not satisfactory” without reasons: Madhya Pradesh High Court. *  Uncorroborated statements can’t establish alleged diversion of duty-free goods: CESTAT. *  Erection services were not liable to service tax prior to 10th september 2004: CESTAT. *  Sec. 74 GST notice must spell out statutory ingredients for invoking extended tax demand proceedings: Allahabad High Court. *  No jurisdictional bar under section 6(2)(b) in parallel CGST SGST proceedings: Delhi High Court refuses to bypass GST appeal remedy. *  Madras High Court remits GST demand for fresh adjudication after taxpayer claims it was unaware of SCN following business closure.  

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