2015 (1) TMI 991 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT Credit - Credit availed in respect of various services - appellant is availing CENVAT Credit in respect of Service Tax paid on expenses for various services, which were not considered as input service for the appellant like, insurance for transit (report) service, transport insurance being beyond the place of removal, brokerage charges, subscription fees, Credit card services etc. for the period - Held that - under Rule 2(l) input includes not only expenses directly related but also indirectly related to the business of manufacturing - services in question are input services for the appellant manufacturer - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Availing CENVAT credit on various input services not considered as input services.
2. Allegation of wrongly availed credit under CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.
3. Bar on limitation for show-cause notice period.
4. Interpretation of the definition of input service under Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.
5. Appeal against the dismissal of the appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals) based on the definition of input service.
6. Club membership charges as an allowable input service.
7. Rulings supporting the appellant's claim on input services.
8. Interpretation of services integrally connected with the business of the assessee.

Analysis:
1. The appellant, a manufacturer of excisable goods, availed CENVAT credit on services like transit insurance, staff insurance, brokerage charges, etc., not considered as input services. The Revenue alleged wrongful credit availed under CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, leading to a show-cause notice for demand, recovery, interest, and penalty. The Order-in-Original confirmed the demand and imposed penalties. The appellant contended entitlement to credit and limitation on the notice period, citing various case laws. The Commissioner dismissed the appeal, emphasizing the lack of connection of services with the manufacture and clearance of final products.

2. The appellant appealed the Commissioner's decision, arguing settled rulings favoring the appellant on similar input services. The appellant highlighted the club membership charges as enhancing business activities, thus allowable as an input service indirectly related to manufacturing. The appellant sought relief based on Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules and limitation grounds.

3. The Revenue supported the impugned order and cited a Tribunal ruling remanding a case for determining activities integrally connected with the assessee's business. The Revenue relied on the third Member's decision and a Bombay High Court ruling in a related matter.

4. The Tribunal found all services in question to be valid input services for the appellant, aligning with previous favorable rulings. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeals and granting the appellant consequential relief, without deciding on the limitation issue.

This judgment emphasizes the interpretation of input services under CENVAT Credit Rules, the relevance of settled rulings, and the connection of services to manufacturing activities for availing CENVAT credit.