M/S. Gokul Cosmetics vs Commissioner Of Central Excise ...
- CitationAppeal No.20/2014 (P), dated 05.02.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appe
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
A Cenvat credit claimant must establish, by specific material on the record, the nexus between each input service claimed and the output goods manufactured; where such material is absent, the credit is not admissible. Where a first appellate authority has disposed of a Cenvat credit claim without examining the evidence adduced in support of it, the matter is to be remanded to that authority to afford the appellant a reasonable opportunity to produce and be heard on the submissions and evidence, and to pass a speaking order dealing with the facts, submissions, evidence and law.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.20/2014 (P), dated 05.02.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Chennai]
M/s. GOKUL COSMETICS APPELLANT
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (SERVICE TAX), PUDUCHERRY RESPONDENT
Appearance:
For the Appellant None
For the Respondent Shri B. Balamurugan, AC (AR)
CORAM:
Honble Shri D.N. Panda, Judicial Member
Date of hearing/decision 28-09-2015
FINAL ORDER NO.
Although notice had gone none appeared for the appellant. Learned departmental representative brings out that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has dealt with each of the items of services in para 8 of his order. Those are (i) Chartered Accountant Service (ii) Insurance Services (iii) Maintenance and Repair Services (iv) Die Making Service and (v) Construction Service. He recorded that when no materials were provided to establish the nexus between input service and output manufactured utility of the service was not appreciable. Therefore, he dismissed the appeal except granting Cenvat credit benefit on count of availing of Chartered Accountants Service.
2. Heard both sides and perused the records.
3. When the grounds of appeal is examined, there is nothing specifically brought out on each count of disallowance of Cenvat credit in the grounds of appeal to suggest availability of evidence to consider whether there was any nexus of the input service to the output manufactured. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) has examined the Insurance Service, he found out that there were no materials as to the Insurance Services availed but only bills were presented. Therefore, appellate authority came to the conclusion that no relief is admissible to the appellant for the reason discussed under each claim. Similarly, in respect of Construction Service, there were also no materials. But, in respect of Chartered Accountants Service, he allowed Cenvat credit without evidence examined by him.
4. In view of the above, it is considered proper to send the matter back to learned Commissioner (Appeals) to provide reasonable opportunity to the appellant and examine the submissions and evidence, if any, adduced in respect of the aforesaid services to support claim of Cenvat credit. In absence of specific materials, appellants shall not be entitled to any Cenvat credit. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) shall pass appropriate speaking order dealing with facts, submissions, evidence and law. (Dictated and pronounced in open court)
(D.N. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER
ksr 03-10-2015
DRAFT Remarks
I II III
Date of dictation 28.09.2015
Draft Order - Date of typing 30.09.2015
Fair Order Typing 03.10.2015
Date of number and date of dispatch 05.10.2015
4 ST/40614/2014
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free