Case Law Details
PMI Organisation Centre Private Limited Vs Commissioner of CGST (CESTAT Mumbai)
CESTAT Mumbai held that amended rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 prescribes the formula for claiming refund of service tax by the service provider. Under such amended rule in vogue, there is no requirement of satisfying the nexus between the input service and the output service and hence order rejecting refund claim for the finding on nexus is not in accordance with law.
Facts-
The appellant sought refund of accumulated CENVAT Credit in exercise of the privilege of monetization extended by rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.
The original authority denied them eligibility for credit to the extent of Rs. 35,71,865/- for alleged lack of nexus and, consequently, access to the credit already taken u/r 3 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. In the impugned order disposing off challenge to the denial in the nine refund applications, the first appellate authority restricted the denial to Rs. 35,34,735/- and, in doing so, not only upheld the ground relied upon in the order of the original authority but, in relation to some of the impugned services, also held these to be non-compliant with the definition in rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 as it stood after the deletion of ‘activities related to business’ from 1st April 2011 besides observing that, in certain instances, the appellant had failed to produce evidence of the said services having been consumed towards ‘output service’ having been rendered.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
