Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Cce & St, Chandigarh-I vs Punjab National Bank on 24 September, 2014
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI COURT NO. IV SINGLE MEMBER BENCH Appeal No.ST/60017/2013 (Arising out of OIA No.CHD-EXCUS-000-APP-88-13-14 dt.18.6.2013 passed by Commissioner, Customs & Central Excise (Appeals), Chandigarh-I) CCE & ST, Chandigarh-I Appellants Vs. Punjab National Bank Respondent
Appearance:
None for the Appellants Shri B.B.Sharma,DR for the Respondent CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr. Manmohan Singh, Member (Technical) Date of Hearing/decision: 24.09.2014 FINAL ORDER NO.53859/2014 Per MANMOHAN SINGH:
None appeared on behalf of the respondent. Notice was issued to the respondent on 10.9.2014 for todays hearing. On earlier occasion, on the request of the respondent, the case was adjourned to 2.4.2014. Again on 2.4.2014, none appeared for the respondent. The case was adjourned to 4.6.2014 and notice was issued. It appears that the respondents are not interested in pursuing the judicial process and have been seeking adjournment and not causing their presence in the court on the stipulated dates of hearing.
2. In view of above, the matter is taken up for hearing with the assistance of learned DR.
3. I have gone through the Order-in-Appeal No.CHD-EXCUS-000-APP-88-13-14 dt.18.6.2013 passed by Commissioner, Customs & Central Excise (Appeals), Chandigarh-I. In para 6 of his order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has analyzed the issue in detail wherein it has been pointed out that zonal office of PNB of Chandigarh was registered with the department for providing banking and financial services but was not registered as ISD at the material time in terms of Rule 3 of RSCP Rules. Since, the zonal office was not registered as ISD, they were not eligible to pass on credit to their respective branch. Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal of the respondent taking into consideration that they were registered under the Banking and Financial Services.
4. Department feeling aggrieved with the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that the zonal office was not registered as ISD at the material time, they were not eligible to pass on credit to their respective branches. I find force in the contention of the department as it is settled law that credit could be taken on the basis of laid down procedure. Once Bank was not registered as ISD, they were not authorized to pass on any credit. Revenue also pointed out that the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Khaitan Electricals Ltd. vs. CCE, Kolkata-VI-2011 (21) STR 184 (Tri.-Kolkata) wherein the depot was not registered as an input service distributor, the appellants were not entitled for credit at Kolkata unit which was in respect of service received by the depot at Jaipur. I find that above referred case law supports the contention of Revenue.
5. In view of above, appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed.
(dictated & Pronounced in the open court)
(Manmohan Singh) Member(Technical) mk
3