Back
CUSTOM EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MADRAS
VICE-PRESIDENT, JYOTI BALASUNDARAM
Lakshmi Automatic Loom Works Ltd. -Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore -Respondent
STAY ORDER NO. 497 OF 2011 E/A/426 OF 2010 E/806 OF 2010
Decided On : 27-05-2011
S.D. Snakaran,T.H. Rao
1. Heard both sides on the application for waiver of pre-deposit of Rs. 8,23,865/- representing alleged wrong availment of credit of service tax during the month of April, 2009. The bulk demand of Rs. 7,61,010/- has been denied on the ground that this amount of credit was taken on the strength of documents on which the input service suppliers had not mentioned the service tax registration number, categories/classification of services, address of the person receiving services including the details of invoices and bills. However, on a perusal of some of the relevant invoices, I find that the name and address of the suppliers as well as the category of service and the address of the recipient of the service is clearly mentioned. Prima facie, non-mentioning of the service tax registration number by the input service supplier cannot be a ground to deny credit to the assessees. As regards credit of Rs. 23,301/-, this amount has been denied on the ground that the assessees did not produce any documents to prove the point that the sale take place at the point of destination (port) and the ownership of the goods remain with the appellants till the delivery of the goods. However, there is nothing to contradict the stand of the assessees that the sale takes place when the goods are laden on board the vessel at the port and since the place of removal is the port, the assessees are prima facie entitled to this amount of credit. As regards availment of credit of Rs. 39,274/- on the basis of invoices having address of the Head Office of the assessees which was not registered as 'input service distributor', the assessees have made out a case for waiver in the light of the Tribunal's decision in Chemplast Sanmar Ltd. v. CCE, LTU 2011 (267) ELT 392 (Trib. - Chennai). I therefore, waive pre-deposit of the amount in question and stay recovery thereof pending the appeal.
