9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (4) TMI 221 - AT - Service TaxAdmissibility of CENVAT Credit - Service Tax paid on CHA services - As per the Tribunals decision in the case of M/s Adani Pharmachem Pvt.Ltd. 2008 -TMI - 31092 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD , wherein the benefit of Service Tax paid on CHA services was held admissible - Decided in favour of assessee. Service Tax paid on courier services - As regards courier services the learned Consultant stated that the same was used for sending documents and definitely it is a activity relating to business - Further, there is no clear finding that the courier service was utilized only after removal of the goods - Decided in favour of assessee. and courier services -
Issues:
Admissibility of CENVAT Credit for Service Tax paid on CHA services and courier services. Analysis: The appeal centered on the admissibility of CENVAT Credit for Service Tax paid on CHA services and courier services to the appellant. The Consultant for the Assessee argued that all activities related to business should be considered as covered by the definition of input services, citing the Hon'ble Mumbai High Court and a Tribunal decision in favor of such credit. On the contrary, the JDR for the Revenue relied on Tribunal decisions that denied such credit for CHA services. The judge considered the submissions and noted that previous decisions were based on specific circumstances and interpretations. In the case at hand, where goods were exported on an FOB basis, the judge determined that CHA services were rendered before the place of removal, making the appellants eligible for CENVAT Credit for Service Tax paid on CHA services. Regarding courier services, the Consultant argued that using them for sending documents is a business-related activity, with no evidence indicating they were utilized only after goods removal. The judge found the Hon'ble Mumbai High Court's decision applicable to the current case, emphasizing that the impugned order lacked merit and needed to be set aside. Consequently, the judge allowed the appeal, providing consequential relief to the appellant.
|
