Full Judgment
Being aggrieved with the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Revenue has filed the present appeal. The dispute relates in availing service tax credit in respect of service tax paid on Goods Transport Agency Services. There is no dispute on the legal issue that the Respondents are entitled to take the said credit. However, Revenues objection was that the same has been availed on the basis of TR-6 Challan, which was not a prescribed document at the relevant time and was introduced in the list of specified documents only with effect from 16-6-2005 by Notification No. 28/2005-C.E. (N.T.) dated 7-6-2005.
The Commissioner (Appeals) vide his impugned order has held the said documents to be proper for the purpose of availing credit by observing as under: TR-6 challan is the most primary document evidencing payment of duty/tax. No doubt the TR-6 challan was not included in the list of specified documents. It was included by virtue of Notification No. 28/2005-CE (NT) dated 7-6-2005. I find that this is an inadvertent omission, which was rectified by issuing the said Notification. This is so because any duty payment documents is related to, and based on TR-6 challan which is the source document. Similar view has been taken up by the Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of National Organics Chemical India Ltd. reported in 2004 (178) E.L.T. 331 (Tribunal).
The appellant's case is squarely covered by this judgment. I, therefore, hold that disallowance of Cenvat credit is not correct.
Consequently interest and penalty also do not sustain.
Order-in-Original is liable to be set aside.
2. Revenue in the Memo of appeal has again reiterated the same stand.
Shri Prakash Shah, learned Advocate appearing for the Respondents submit that during the relevant time there was no list of specified documents on the basis of which credit could be taken. I have also heard Shri C.S. Biradar and Shri S.R. Savant appearing for other appellants. As such, the Appellate authority was right in holding TR-6 challan as the basis for availing service tax credit.
3. I agree with the reason adopted by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Revenue in their appeal has nowhere contended as to what was the specified document for availing credit during the relevant time. If no document was mentioned, TR-6 challan has to be considered as the proper document reflecting payment of duties. Further, it is also not the Revenue's case that the service tax was not paid by the Respondents or they were otherwise not entitled to the credit of the same.
In this view of the matter, I do not find any infirmity in the Commissioner (Appeals) order. The Revenue's appeals are therefore rejected.