2014 (6) TMI 277 - AT - Service Tax

CENVAT Credit - Whether CENVAT Credit of service tax paid by the appellant on repair of internal roads of the appellant s factory was admissible to the appellant - Held that - Lower appellate authority after going through the relevant invoice and agreement with the service provider, namely SMPS Consultants, Ahmedabad, found that work undertaken by the service provider was Carpet Seal Coat and Patch Work of internal and outside Bituminous Road of appellant s project at Lab-Detergent Complex Alindra, and that the payment advice note dated 25.08.2008 also confirmed the same. Lower appellate authority, therefore, rejected the appellant s appeal on this issue on the ground that the appellant had not been able to establish that the entire credit pertained to repairing of road inside the factory premises. Appellant had now produced copy of Certificate dated 06/12/2012, issued by the service provider - M/s Patel Engineers - to the effect that only internal roads of the appellant s factory were repaired by them against appellant s Work Order No. 8001005DO080400002/L dated 17/04/2008. As these papers were not produced before the adjudicating authority, therefore, the issue requires to be examined afresh to ascertain the factual position. - Decided in favour of assessee. Whether CENVAT Credit of service tax paid by the appellant on maintenance and repair of the security vehicle used within the factory premises by the Security Agency was admissible to the appellant - Held that - As per rule 9(1) (f) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, a manufacturer of dutiable goods can take CENVAT Credit of service tax paid on any input service on the basis of invoice issued by service provider if the input service is actually received and used, whether directly or indirectly, in or in relation to the manufacture of dutiable final products as defined in Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. In the present case the appellant has two invoices date 13/10/2007, issued by Security Agency, for the years 2004 to 2006 evidencing payment of service tax on maintenance & repair of the security vehicle and reimbursement of petrol expenses, but there is nothing on record to show that the Security Agency actually carried out any maintenance or repair of the appellant s security vehicle, as repair or maintenance of vehicles is generally undertaken by workshops/ service stations and not by a Security Agency - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Admissibility of CENVAT Credit on repair of internal roads within factory premises.
2. Admissibility of CENVAT Credit on maintenance and repair of security vehicle used by Security Agency within factory premises.

Analysis:

Issue 1:
The appellant contended that CENVAT Credit for service tax paid on repair of internal roads within the factory premises was admissible. The appellant produced a certificate confirming the repair work was limited to internal roads. However, the lower appellate authority had rejected the appeal due to lack of evidence establishing the entire credit pertained to internal road repairs. The Tribunal noted the need for a fresh examination of the issue based on the newly produced certificate.

Issue 2:
Regarding the admissibility of CENVAT Credit on maintenance and repair of the security vehicle used within the factory premises by the Security Agency, the Tribunal referred to Rule 9(1)(f) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The rule allows credit if the service is used directly or indirectly in relation to manufacturing dutiable final products. The Tribunal observed that while invoices showed payment for maintenance and repair of the security vehicle, there was no evidence that the Security Agency actually conducted such maintenance or repair. The Tribunal directed the Adjudicating Authority to conduct a detailed examination of this aspect.

In conclusion, the Tribunal disposed of the appeal by remanding the case to the original adjudicating authority for a fresh decision after providing the appellant with an opportunity for a personal hearing to present their case effectively.