Order Date: 10 August 2022

Facts -

• The Appellant, Corob India Pvt Ltd submitted that the appellant has not made any payment to Foreign Service Provider M/s. CPS Colour Group Oy.
• The Appellant submitted a ledger copy and C.A certificate to this effect. As per these documents, it is clear that the appellant has not made any payment towards the service charges to Foreign Service Provider. However, the appellant has paid the Service tax on their own account, therefore, the claim of the appellant is not hit by Rule 4 (7) 4th proviso of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.
• The appellant further submitted that the demand is also hit by limitation as there is no suppression or misdeclaration.
• The department submitted that since the appellant have received the credit note in respect of the value of service their Cenvat claim is hit by Rule 4 (7) 4th proviso of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.

Issue -

• Whether the appellant is required to pay back the Cenvat Credit availed on Service tax paid on services received from abroad on reverse charge basis?

Order -

• The Tribunal observed that the only reason for demand of Cenvat Credit availed on the Service tax paid on the reverse charge basis in respect of services received from abroad is that in terms of Rule 4 (7) 4th proviso of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, since, the appellant have received the credit note from the service provider, they are not eligible for Cenvat Credit. In this regard, the Learned Counsel has submitted the ledger copy and C.A certificate which was not available before the adjudicating authority. Therefore, the matter needs to be re-considered by the adjudicating authority, after perusing the documents submitted before us.
• The matter is remanded back to the adjudicating authority to decide the case on merit as well as the limitation. 
• The impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.