Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Commissioner Of Customs, Central ... vs M/S Kesarwani Zarda Bhandar on 11 March, 2016
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
REGIONAL BENCH : ALLAHABAD
ST Appeal No. : ST/51713/2014 &
Cross Objection No. : ST/CROSS/52825/2014
Arising out of O/A No. 105/ST/ALLD/2013 dated 07.11.2013, passed by Commr. (Appeals) of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Allahabad
For approval and signature:
HONBLE MR. ANIL CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see
the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? : No
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication
in any authoritative report or not? : Yes
3. Whether His Lordship wishes to see the fair copy
of the Order? : Seen
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental
Authorities? : Yes
Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax,
Allahabad.
APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
M/s Kesarwani Zarda Bhandar, RESPONDENT(S)
APPEARANCE Shri Rajeev Ranjan (Joint Commr.) A.R., for the Department Shri Bipin Garg (Adv.) & Ms. Rinki Arora (Adv.) for the Respondent(s) CORAM:
HONBLE MR. ANIL CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) DATE OF HEARING & PRONOUNCEMENT : 11. 03. 2016 FINAL ORDER NO._70636/2016______________________ Per Mr. Anil Choudhary :
The Appellant, Revenue, is in appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 105/ST/ALLD/2013 dated 07-11-2013, passed by ld. Commissioner (Appeals), Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Allahabad.
2. Brief fact of the case is that M/s Kesarwani Zarda Bhandar, Sahson, (Respondent) are engaged in the manufacture of Branded Chewing Tobacco classified under Tariff item No. 24039910 to the First Schedule of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They are also availing Cenvat credit facility on the inputs as well as the input services in terms of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The GTA is one of the Services on which the appellant is paying Service Tax as recipient of service.
3. During the course of scrutiny of records, it was observed that the appellant had received goods from various manufacturer/supplier on which freight is being paid by the manufacturer/supplier but the Service Tax on the freight is not being paid by the Supplier/Consignor but the same is being paid by the respondent/purchaser i.e. M/s. Kesarwani Zarda Bhandar, Sahson, Allahabad who are availing credit of the same as GTA Service, which is not correct in view of the fact the CENVAT Credit of input service is allowed only after payments towards value of service and service tax both are made as per the provisions contained in Rule 4(7) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 which stipulates that the CENVAT Credit in respect of input service shall be allowed on or after the day on which payment is made of the value of input service and the service tax paid or payable as is indicated in invoice, bill or, as the case may be, Challan referred to in Rule 9. Whereas in the case of the appellant, only service tax component has been paid by the appellant and not the value of the input service.
4. Heard the parties.
5. Having considered the rival contentions, we find that as the Service Tax is to be paid under Rule 4(7) and challan is a document for taking credit under Rule 9 of CCR, and the Service Tax is payable for GTA Services under Rule 2 (1) (d) (v) of the Service Tax Rules,1994 by consignor/consignee being manufacturer. Thus, Cenvat credit has rightly been availed. Thus, the Appeal filed by the Revenue, is dismissed. C.O. stands allowed.
(Pronounced in the open Court) Sd/-
(ANIL CHOUDHARY) MEMBER (JUDICIAL) (Ansari) 3 ST Appeal No.51713/14 Cross Objection No. 52825/14