CESTAT, CHENNAI BENCH
Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai
v.
Varizon Data Services (I) (P.) Ltd.
STAY ORDER NO. 369 OF 2012
FINAL ORDER NO. 517 OF 2012
ST/S/419/2011 & ST/654/2011
MAY 9, 2012
Insofar as requirement of registration with the department as a condition precedent for claiming Cenvat credit is concerned, learned counsel appearing for both parties were unable to point out any provision in the Cenvat Credit Rules which impose such restriction. In the absence of a statutory provision which prescribed that registration is mandatory and that if such a registration is not made the assessee is not entitled to the benefit of refund, the three authorities committed a serious error in rejecting the claim for refund on the ground which is not existence in law. Therefore, said finding recorded by the Tribunal as well as by the lower authorities cannot be sustained. Accordingly, it is set aside.
No comments:
Post a Comment