9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (7) TMI 748 - AT - Central ExciseCenvat credit - Benefit of Cenvat credit of service denied to authorities - Held that - there is no dispute that service tax stand PAID by the service provider. The recipient of services is entitled to avail the credit paid by the service provider and the assessment at the end of the service provider cannot be reopened at the service recipient s end - Following decision of MILLIPORE INDIA LTD. Versus CCE, BANGALORE-II 2008 (11) TMI 97 - CESTAT, BANGALORE , V. G. Steel Industry Versus CCE 2011 (5) TMI 154 - Punjab and Haryana High Court - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues: Denial of Cenvat credit for service tax paid on horticulture and garden maintenance services.
In the judgment delivered by Ms. Archana Wadhwa, the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI addressed the issue of denial of Cenvat credit for service tax paid by the appellant to the service provider engaged in maintenance of garden and horticulture at the appellant's premises. The lower authorities had denied the benefit of Cenvat credit, stating that horticulture and garden maintenance did not fall under the definition of input services. However, Ms. Archana Wadhwa referred to various decisions of the Tribunal, including the case of Millipore India Ltd. vs. CCE, Bangalore, which was upheld by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court. It was established that horticulture services are indeed cenvatable services, thereby allowing the appellant to claim the credit. Additionally, the judgment clarified that the recipient of services is entitled to avail the credit paid by the service provider, even if the service was exempted from tax. The assessment at the service provider's end cannot be reopened at the service recipient's end, as per established legal principles, as seen in the case of M/s. V G Steel Industries vs. CCE by the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Consequently, Ms. Archana Wadhwa set aside the impugned order and allowed both appeals, providing consequential relief to the appellants. The judgment emphasized the settled legal position regarding the availability of Cenvat credit for horticulture services and the rights of the service recipient in such cases.
|
