HERO HONDA MOTORS LTD. Vs. CST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed against order -in -Original No. 02/RDN -2010 dated 06/01/2010.

(2.) HEARD both sides and perused the records.

(3.) REVENUE authorities are of the view that the Appellant could not utilize the CENVAT credit for discharge of service tax on the GTA services. Coming to such a conclusion show cause notice was issued for the recovery of the amount paid by the Appellant during the period 1st January 2005 to 30th September 2005. Appellant contested the show cause notice before the Adjudicating Authority. Adjudicating Authority after considering the pleas made by the Appellant before him dropped the proceedings initiated, following the precedent case laws stated by the Appellant. Learned Commissioner as a revisional authority, under Section 84 of the Finance Act, 1994, issued a show cause notice to the Appellant for review in the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority. Appellant contested the said show cause notice before the learned Commissioner. Learned Commissioner as a revisional authority came to the conclusion that Appellant could not have utilized the CENVAT credit for the discharge of service tax liability on the GTA services, and they are to be considered as deemed output service provider and not actual service provider. Coming to such conclusion he confirmed demands, imposed consequential penalties and demanded interest on the service tax amount confirmed.