Stay abreast with the latest developments in the professional domain along with in-depth analysis through the monthly BCA Journal. Get access to an engaging library of researched publications from the BCAS stable.
Learn MoreImportant Amendments by The Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024 – Charitable Trusts
Read MoreImportant Amendments by The Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024 – Capital Gains
Read MoreImportant Amendments by The Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024 – Buy-Back of Shares
Read MoreImportant Amendments by The Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024 – Re-Assessment Procedures
Read MoreImportant Amendments by The Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024 – Block Assessment
Read MoreImportant Amendments By The Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024 – Other Important Amendments
Read MoreBCAJ Brieficles are short-format, web-only articles on contemporary topics of professional importance that are open-for-all to read & share.
Explore BrieficlesExplore past issues of BCA Journal & indulge in a treasure trove of high-quality professional content across format of print, videos & learning events from the BCAS stable.
Learn MoreMonthly mouth-piece of BCAS, the BCA Journal is a leading publication that has been in continuous circulation for more than 53 years. Over the years the BCAJ has become synonymous with high-quality & authentic content across fields of finance, accounting, tax & regulatory matters. The BCAJ has wide circulation across India & commands huge respect amongst the Chartered Accountants` community.
Learn MoreFor queries, collaborations, and insights to forge, Drop a line, share thoughts, inquiries galore, At BCAJ, your messages, we eagerly explore.
Learn MoreFacts:
The assessee appealed against the denial of CENVAT credit of the service tax paid by their job worker in the common order of the Commissioner (Appeals). However, the said order held the demand to be time-barred and also refrained from imposing penalty u/s. 11AC. This was challenged in the Revenue’s appeal.
Held:
The Tribunal observed that the Department relied on Bombay Dyeing & manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner, [2001 (135) ELT 1392 (Tribunal)] which is contradictory to the decision relied on by the appellants in SPIC (HCD) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai, [2006 (201) ELT 386 (Tri- Chennai)] for granting CENVAT credit for the service tax paid by the job worker. According to one of the well-established tenets of judicial discipline, where there are contradictory decisions of two Coordinate Benches, the later one would prevail. Therefore the view taken in the SPIC (HCD) Ltd. would be appropriate precedent. The assessee’s appeal for CENVAT credit of service tax paid by job worker to be allowed. Consequently, the Revenue’s appeal was dismissed.