Page 134 - GSTL_11th June 2020_Vol 37_Part 2

220 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 37
credit. This Tribunal observed that discharging the service tax liability by making
use of accumulated Cenvat credit is a valid mode of discharging the tax liability.
Further, held that admittedly ST-3 returns were filed prior to show cause notice,
though belatedly, but these were not considered for issuing the show cause no-
tice. The matter was remanded to consider the returns and the evidence of pay-
ment of service tax, and work out the balance liability if any, by passing de novo
order of adjudication.
5. In response thereto vide Order-in-Original dated 28-2-2018, the Joint
Commissioner in para 11 have given the detail chart containing the monthwise
duty liability and the satisfaction of same from eligible Cenvat credit by the as-
sessee. It is seen that for the period under dispute, no balance service tax is paya-
ble. Thereafter, the adjudicating authority has further observed that as the ST-3
returns for the period under dispute were filed on 22-11-2007, that will be the
date of adjustment of tax payable with the cenvat credit available, and according-
ly have calculated the liability of interest under Section 75 and have also imposed
penalty of Rs. 11,47,132/-, equal to tax under Section 78 of the Act, and have also
imposed penalty of Rs. 16,000/- under Section 70 read with Rule 7C of the Ser-
vice Tax Rules, 1994 for delay in filing of the returns.
6. Having considered the rival contentions and on perusal of record, I
find that there is no provision in the Finance Act, 1994 read with Service Tax
Rules enabling the adjudicating authority to assume the date of filing returns as
the date of adjustment of Cenvat credit with tax paid. Accordingly, I hold that
the order of Court below is illegal. Accordingly, the demand of interest under
Section 75 and penalty under Section 78 are set aside. The penalty under Section
70 read with Rule 7C is upheld.
7. Thus, the appeal is allowed in part. The appellant is entitled to con-
sequential benefit in accordance with law.
(Dictated and pronounced in open Court)

_______

2020 (37) G.S.T.L. 220 (Tri. - Chan.)
IN THE CESTAT, REGIONAL BENCH, CHANDIGARH
Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (J)
USHA MARTIN LIMITED
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF C. EX. & S.T., LUDHIANA
Final Order No. 60821/2019, dated 16-10-2019 in Appeal No. ST/60889/2019-SM
Cenvat credit - Input service - Service Tax paid on transportation
charges for transport of goods by road and train from ICD upto the port for
export, eligible to Cenvat credit as port of export to be considered as place of
removal in view of provisions of Section 2(18) of Customs Act, 1962 defining
term ‘export’ - Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. [paras 5, 6, 7]
Appeal allowed
GST LAW TIMES  11th June 2020  134