Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Rajasthan State Road Development And ... vs Commissioner, Central Excise & ... on 15 February, 2023 CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI PRINCIPAL BENCH COURT NO. II Service Tax Appeal No. 51463 of 2022 (SM) (Arising out of OrderinAppeal No. 164(CRM)ST/JDR/2021 dated 27.07.2021 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) CGST & Central Excise, Jodhpur) M/s Rajasthan State Raod Development Appellant And Construction Corporation Ltd Setu Bhawan, JaipurAgra Bye Pass, Jhalana Doongri, Jaipur, Rajasthan302004. VERSUS Commissioner, Central Excise & Respondent CGSTJodhpur G105, New Indstrial Area, Opp. Diesel Shed, Basni, Jodhpur Rajasthan342901 APPEARANCE: None for the Appellant Shri Mahesh Bhardwaj, Authorised Representative for the Respondent HON'BLE MR. ANIL CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) FINAL ORDER NO. 50228/2023 Date of Hearing: 15.02.2023 Date of Decision: 15.02.2023 ANIL CHOUDHARY: The appellant is absent on call. I find that the appellant was absent on previous five occasions also. On one or two occasions, the Counsel had appeared and sought adjournment which was last granted on 14/11/2022, neither there is any prayer for adjournment. Accordingly, it is decided that the appeal is taken up for hearing ex parte with the assistance of learned AR. 2. The brief facts are that the appellant is a Public Sector Undertaking (PSU) of Government of Rajasthan and were registered 2 ST/51463/2022SM with the service tax department. Appellant is engaged in providing and receiving of Construction Services other than Residential Complex, also Renting of immovable property service, Works Contract Service, Legal Consultancy Service, etc. 3. During the course of audit, it appeared that appellant have wrongly availed Cenvat credit of Rs. 17,56,714/ which is not on the proper documents as prescribed under Rule 9(1) of CCR, during the period April 2015 to March 2017. The credit, it appeared was taken on the basis of 'running account bills' prepared by the staff of the appellant (service receiver) containing measurement of work and amount to be paid to the Contractor (service provider). It appeared, these bills do not contain the mandatory information required for availing Cenvat credit in terms of Rule 9(1) of CCR. Accordingly, SCN dated 25.01.2020 was issued proposing recovery of Cenvat credit taken Rs. 17,56,714/ with further proposal to impose penalty under Rule 15 of CCR r/w Section 78 of the Act. 4. The appellant contested the SCN by filing reply dated 13.08.2020 wherein they inter alia urged that they being a PSU are required to follow the rules and guidelines framed by the State Government, which have prescribed the format of bills, known as running bill. The Bills are prepared jointly by the department and the Contractor (service provider). These running bills contain all such details and particulars like name of contractorsupplier of service, taxable value, service tax amount etc. The details of the contractors were already made available to the department and thus was verifiable by the department. Evidently the suppliers of service 3 ST/51463/2022SM contractors are selected by process of tendering who are in almost all cases registered with the service tax department. Complete details of such contractors was provided to the audit team. Payment on the basis of the running bills under dispute was made to the contractors through banking channels. Thus, there is no doubt regarding authenticity of the running bills. Further, Rule 9(2) r/w Rule 9(1) provides that even in case of some minor discrepancy in the bill or document on the basis of which Cenvat credit is taken, the Adjudicating Authority is empowered to verify the details and in case of transaction being genuine, allow the Cenvat credit so taken. Further, evidently appellant have maintained proper books of accounts and vouchers and have availed Cenvat credit on the genuine transaction of service, received from the contractors who are registered with the service tax department. It is the normal practice in the matter of civil work or works contract received by the Government department/ PSU, that periodical running bill is prepared on the basis of measurement taken jointly by the service receiver and service provider. Thereafter, the running bill is prepared and which forms the basis of payment to the contractor after deduction of security deposit, income tax, sales tax etc etc. Admittedly, service tax has b