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/2014-15/2299

Whether service tax payment for GTA service valid from cenvat credit?

Case:-UNION OF INDIA VS. FLOWSERVE MICROFINISH VALVES PVT. LTD.

Citation:-2014(33) S.T.R. 634 (Kar.)

Brief facts:-The respondent assessee in under Service Tax as well as manufacture of excise goods and since it was found that the credit accumulated for the payment of Service Tax of goods etc. on the ground that the goods transport service cannot be treated as Service Tax as they are providing service to other users and credit had been wrongly availed, the Adjudicating Authority held that the assessee was not entitled to avail Cenvat Credit and accordingly passed the original order on 27-6-2006 to the extent of Rs. 5910 & Rs. 3920. And education cess amount of Rs. 119 & Rs. 2523 utilized towards payment of Service Tax on GRA services by the assessee for the period from Jan., 2005 to sept. 2005, respectively is irregular and confirmed the demand of Service Tax amount of Rs. 5910 & Rs. 3920. And education cess amount of Rs. 119 & Rs. 2523 respectively under sub section (2) of section 73 of the Act and further confirmed the demand of interest at the appropriate rate under section 75 of the act on the above said amount. Being aggrieved by the above orders, the instant appeals were preferred before the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority passed a common order holding that the availing of credit on Service Tax on goods transported service paid by the recipient of such service is not available unless the person concerned is also providing some other output services or is manufacturing dutiable goods on which Cenvat Credit taken on input service as well as input goods is available for utilization and there is no one to one correlation between credit availed and utilized and in view of the Circular dated 3-10-2005 issued by the Department C.B.E. & C., does not bar the appellant from availing the credit on good transport input services or on manufactured goods and accordingly allowed the appeals.

Appellant’s contention:-Being aggrieved by the said order, these appeals are preferred by the Revenue contending that the assessee was not entitled to make use of Cenvat credit as rightly held by the Original Authority and the Appellate Authority was not justified in reversing the order passed by the Original Authority. Therefore the order of the Tribunal may be set aside and the order of the Original Authority may be restored.

Respondent’s contention:- The learned counsel appearing for the respondents argued in support of the order passed by the Appellate Authority and the Tribunal.

Reasoning of judgement:-We have given careful consideration to the contentions of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and scrutinized the materials on record.

The fact that the respondent has been assessed both under the Excise Act and the Service Tax is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that in view of the Circular issued by C.B.E. &C, dated 3-10-2005 referred to in order of the Appellate Authority, when the person discharging Service Tax liability is not the provider of output services, such recipient of taxable service even if they discharge their service tax liability under section 68(2) are not entitled to avail credit of the Service Tax paid on taxable services. However, there is no prohibition for utilizing the credit for the payment of Service Tax. Therefore the concurrent finding arrived at by the appellate authority and the Tribunal and in view of the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE, Chandigarh vs. M/s Nahar Industries Enterprises Ltd. [2007- TIOL-555-CESTAT-MAD = 2007(7) S.T.R. 569 (Tri.- Chennai)] andThe India Cements Ltd. Vs. CCE, Salem [2007-TIOL-645-CESTAT-MAD = 2007(7) S.T.R. 569 (Tri.-Chennai) wherein similar issue as involved in this case has been answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.

In view of the above, we hold that the order passed by the appellate authority and the Tribunal is justified and in the facts of the case do not give rise to any question of law to be decided in these appeals.

Decision:-Appeals dismissed.
 

Comment:-The substance of the case is that the credit utilisation for payment of service tax for GTA service has been confirmed by the High Court in the case of Nahar Industries Enterprises and The India Cements Ltd. In view of the said decisions, it was concluded that the issue is settled and the appeal filed by the revenue department was dismissed.


Prepared by: - Lovina Surana
 
 

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