2011 (4) TMI 206 - HC - Service Tax

Cenvat credit - The assessee had availed and utilized input service tax credit relating to transportation services provided to the staff for pickup and drop from their residence to the factory and vice versa - CCE v. Stanzen Toyotetsu India (P.) Ltd. 2011 - TMI - 204471 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT - providing of transportation services would amount to activity relating to business . It is further came to the view that even though the transportation services are not expressly mentioned in the definition of input service it cannot be said that they do not constitute input service and the assessee is not entitled to the benefit of Cenvat credit.

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal by revenue against Tribunal's order allowing Cenvat credit on service tax paid for transportation services to staff.
- Interpretation of whether transportation services provided to staff qualify as input service under Cenvat Credit Rules.
- Comparison with a similar case regarding availment of Cenvat credit for service tax paid on employee conveyance.
- Determination of whether transportation services constitute an activity "relating to business" and qualify for Cenvat credit.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the revenue challenging the Tribunal's decision allowing the assessee to avail Cenvat credit on service tax paid for transportation services provided to their staff. The revenue contended that transportation services did not fall under the definition of input service as per the Cenvat Credit Rules. The assessee argued that the transportation was a welfare measure directly impacting manufacturing activities and final product quality. The Assessing Authority and Commissioner upheld the demand, but the Tribunal, relying on a previous decision, ruled in favor of the assessee.

2. The main issue revolved around whether transportation services for staff, specifically pickup and drop from residence to the factory, qualified as an input service under the Cenvat Credit Rules. The Court referred to a similar case involving employee conveyance and held that providing transportation to ensure timely workforce presence directly related to business activities. The Court concluded that even though transportation services were not explicitly listed as input services, they still constituted activities "relating to business," making the assessee eligible for Cenvat credit.

3. The Court addressed the substantial question of law regarding the interpretation of transportation services as input services under the Cenvat Credit Rules. Citing a previous judgment in a related matter, the Court emphasized the importance of transportation for ensuring a punctual workforce and its direct impact on business operations. Consequently, the Court ruled in favor of the assessee, affirming that transportation services qualified as activities "relating to business" and thus eligible for Cenvat credit.

4. In conclusion, the Court disposed of the appeal in line with the previous decision, answering the substantial questions of law in favor of the assessee and against the revenue. The judgment highlighted the significance of transportation services for business operations and manufacturing activities, ultimately allowing the assessee to avail Cenvat credit on service tax paid for staff transportation, setting a precedent for similar cases in the future.