2011 (2) TMI 1137 - AT - Service Tax

Cenvat credit on service tax denied - use of JCB in relation to activities in compost yard - Held that - The fact that the spent wash has been taken to compost yard which was situated at 2 Kms away from the factory, does not take away the same activity other than part of business activity related to manufacture of final products. Use of the JCB for the purpose of unloading of another material namely press mud required for converting the waste into bio compost is, therefore, part of the activities in treating the waste. Therefore, the submissions on behalf of the respondents that the entire activities is part of effluent treatment and therefore activities related to use of JCB should be treated as input services in relation to their business deserves to be accepted. In favour of assessee. Landscaping activities - Held that - Landscapping services cannot be treated as having been used in or in relation to the manufacture of final products, namely, the safety valves - Decided against the assessee

Summary

Issues: Appeal against denial of credit on service tax for Landscaping activities and use of JCB.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the department against the Commissioner (Appeals) order denying credit on service tax for Landscaping activities and use of JCB in relation to activities in the compost yard.
2. The respondents, manufacturers of Denatured Ethyl Alcohol, claimed credit on service tax paid for activities related to plantation of trees inside the plant area and the use of JCB in the compost yard.
3. The original authority denied the credit, leading to an appeal by the party and subsequent setting aside of the order by the Commissioner (Appeals).
4. The department argued that the compost yard activities were not directly related to manufacturing activities and, therefore, credit should not be allowed.
5. On the landscaping services, the department contended that TNPCB norms did not mandate landscaping, citing a Tribunal decision in a similar case.
6. The respondents argued that the compost yard activities were essential for waste treatment, which is integral to their manufacturing process, and should be considered part of their business activity.
7. The Tribunal found that the activities in the compost yard were indeed related to the manufacturing process, as waste disposal is crucial for continuing production.
8. However, regarding landscaping services, the Tribunal differentiated between planting trees as per TNPCB norms and undertaking landscaping services, ultimately siding with the department's appeal.
9. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) order on JCB-related services but set aside the order on landscaping activities, restoring the original authority's decision, while not reinstating the penalty imposed.

This detailed analysis of the judgment provides a comprehensive overview of the issues involved, the arguments presented by both sides, and the Tribunal's reasoning leading to the final decision on each aspect of the appeal.